Socio-Political Events and Music: Egyptian Songs Supporting ʿAbd Fattāḥ al-Sīsī

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript has a great potential as it offers a unique perspective on the role of music in Egyptian political life. I highly recommend that the author develop the work from a critical and theoretical approach. I also encourage the author to invest in literature to carve out the gap in knowledge that this work fills. I earnestly think that this paper can have a great impact on current literature and can add much needed focus on music in how it shaped emotional responses to political messaging and action.  

That said, I strongly invite the author to do the following:  

Establish a robust well-founded thesis. What is the main argument that this work makes? This reviewer could only surmise that there are songs about El-Sisi. Beyond that, there was no clear claim.  

Introduce the impact of music on political life and political campaigning. As is, there is no adequate discussion of scholarship on the use of song (music) in political contexts. More so, the study at hand leaves the impression that only in Egypt and as of late, has there been use of music to rally support or shape a politician’s image. Is there any historical evidence to discuss of how music has been part and parcel of societies in constructing national myths, identities, and creating emotionally charged calls to collective action?  

Define the method in a more meaningful way. Establish a method and make an argument for how a particular method(s) is a valid tool to serve the main research question. Use scholarly literature to support the claim or validity and reliability considering the limitations of the methods and what considerations went into the selection of instrument and samples for analysis.

Apply in-depth analysis of artifacts. As it stands, the manuscript’s treatment of the selection of songs is descriptive. Moreover, the discussion appears more subjective than a removed objective reading of visual, lyrical, and audible content. If it is meant to be subjective, great: describe it within the method. If not, again, use literature of other studies to identify how scholarship has established sound ways to critically explore songs and music videos.

Support claims with evidence. Use sources to justify a claim and clarify how it not a hypothetical statement, rather a statement of fact. For example, there are instances in which the author uses phrases such as “the topic […] has been widely analyzed” with only two citations following. It is an exaggeration to claim that two studies to be a “wide” array of analyses. Such claims undermine the seriousness of the work.

Develop the literature review. The number of studies is way below what one expects for an academic work. There needs to be a more comprehensive selection of scholarly sources.

Connect the literature review with the topic of study. The connection between the argument and literature review is merely topical. I highly recommend developing a literature review on the historical context (Egypt or elsewhere) as well as the evolution of relationship between music and the political sphere.

Expand on theory. What do the findings present from a theoretical perspective? The discussion and conclusion point to the author’s proclivity to the Egyptian president. This reviewer’s take away was: “there are songs about El-Sisi and they are jubilant.” Fine, but what else? What about the resonance of these sounds with non-Sisi supporters? What other perspectives could there be? Where is the interesction between political support and rhythm. (speaking of which, there needs to be a serious understanding and discussion of music as a language: melodies, lyrics, rhythms... etc.)

I feel that the manuscript stopped short of fully conveying the author’s intent in distilling and delving into a unique cultural phenomenon. While I am thrilled at the prospects of this attempt, I highly encourage the author to consider the multifaceted approach to this phenomenon.  

I very much hope that the author takes reviewer suggestions and proceeds with improvements. This is important work.  

There are a number of typos and grammatical errors (tense agreement) that distract from the author’s intended ideas. At some instances, the text reads as if it were writing in Arabic and run through a Google Translate AI engine.  

I highly recommend that the author work on editing or hiring an editor with a mastery of English to better convey the meaning behind the iterations with clarity and concision.  

The structure and flow make reading the paper confusing. A major issue is in how there is a discussion of method before establishing what the study is about.  

There is a superfluous use of pronouns where sometimes it becomes a challenge to understand what pronoun refers to whom.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 

thank you very much for your comments. I tried to improve my text and also asked for English proofreading. I hope now my paper is better and you will accept it to be published.

I truly apologize for the delay. It was connected with the fact that I didn't receive the Email with English corrections - the Email arrived to me just today.

Yours sincerely, 

Author

Reviewer 2 Report

You can add future trends in your research area 

You must make depth to your findings by adding solid theoretical framework to be testified and explanation 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 

thank you very much for your comments. I tried to improve my text and also asked for English proofreading. I hope now my paper is better and you will accept it to be published.

I truly apologize for the delay. It was connected with the fact that I didn't receive the Email with English corrections - the Email arrived to me just today.

Yours sincerely, 

Author

Reviewer 3 Report

The main drawback of the article lies in its methodological issues. The author refers to discourse analysis but fails to employ any specific methodology and does not analyze the content of songs in accordance with, for instance, Foucault; instead, he merely presents their content.

The author frequently relies on their own experiences and conversations with Egyptians. However, apart from photographs, this is not substantiated by any necessary methodological information concerning the circumstances of the conversations, the number, age, and background of the interlocutors, or the existence of a record of the conversations. Participant observation should not be limited solely to event description (&215-228).

The section of the article pertaining to the Egyptians' attitude toward authority and events is not grounded in a methodology that would enable the and scientific justification of the presented conclusions.

Some sentences do not belong to the scientific discourse (218-220)

Author Response

Dear Reviewer, 

thank you very much for your comments. I tried to improve my text and also asked for English proofreading. I hope now my paper is better and you will accept it to be published.

I truly apologize for the delay. It was connected with the fact that I didn't receive the Email with English corrections - the Email arrived to me just today.

Yours sincerely, 

Author

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

In the current form no more comments

In the current form no more comments

Author Response

Thank you very much for your review. It is highly appriciated. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf