On Feminist Aesthetics and Anti-Propaganda in Russia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article submitted for review raises important issues related to the current situation of culture in Russia, in particular feminist art and activism. The intentions of the article are extremely important and necessary, especially in view of the current situation in Russia, which contributes to the increase in censorship, state control of artistic creators, and state violence against any actions that go beyond the socialist ideology of Putin's regime. Therefore, the article can be a valuable source of information on the current situation of critical and feminist art, but also more broadly, the condition of contemporary Russian anti-propaganda culture. The activities, actions, exhibitions, and performances described above show that despite the pandemic, ongoing war, and dictatorship, feminist activity in Russia is an important component of the anti-Putin opposition.

However, it should be emphasized that the above description exhausts the content of the article, which definitely lacks an in-depth critical and philosophical analysis of the above-mentioned phenomena. There is no clearly formulated thesis and no structured arguments against it.

Especially:
- the Author focuses on the enumeration of certain artistic or scientific phenomena and events (conference) and expresses his/her own opinion on them. Of course, this is not disqualifying, but what is missing is a more scientific explanation of the discussed phenomena, showing their cultural, philosophical, and aesthetic contexts;
- the title of the article does not reflect its content. I expected an article presenting an analysis of feminist aesthetic theory and propaganda, including their relationships, the influence of one on the other, mutual connections, or how feminist aesthetics affects propaganda, and whether and how it changes, criticizes, and transforms the latter. Unfortunately, the article concerns more concrete artistic activities of a feminist nature than feminist aesthetics as such. Similarly, the first part of the title is rather enigmatic and basically refers only to the last paragraph of the text (in which there is an anecdote about a woman and her pet, a python) and the Author's personal impressions related to the anecdote;
- the text lacks references to the literature on the subject, such as those analyzing the history of feminist art in Russia, or, more broadly, feminist activism in Russian society. Similarly, there are no references to literature on feminist aesthetics (with the exception of a reference to an anthology of texts edited by Deepwell and a text by Rita Felski).

In conclusion, the idea for the article is excellent and certainly complements the current state of knowledge about feminist creativity and activities in contemporary Russia. However, it is highly advisable that the Author rethink the structure of the paper, making it more scientific. It is important that the thesis and arguments in favor of it sound out. It is primarily about focusing on feminist aesthetics and its relationship with propaganda in relation to the culture of contemporary Russia. It is also necessary to expand the literature and improve the text in terms of language (unfortunately, language imperfections make it difficult to read the text efficiently).

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The title needs a subtitle with  ref to todays's Russia? to be understood as the python metaphor  comes at the very, very end. Could the author begin with this and then state the objectives of the article, prior to her narrative?  The English is generally excellent. However the footnote numbers seem to have disappeared as do any italics to distinguish the titles of books, exhibitions and plays referred to plus inverted commas  needed forthe article line. 204. The footnote references (as readable now) could be clearer/more extensive with original Russian and English translations where necessary? In particular one desires a reference to Felski's crucial article line 203-4. While one grasps what SOW refers to it is not clear - in English one says 'special military operation' (SMO?) 'Goyda patriotism etc l 58 will be illuminated by the footnote.

Specifics (exept book, play expo title italics and footnotes and SWO:

 108 the or an Ontology of Feminism

119 if you see your arguments (no comma)

126 to give up

134 above-mentioned

156 interest in

190 by Victoria Lomasko

198 not really a prioity

311 is discussed

343 macho not Machiste

363 notes - dedicated male role-playing ? not 'severe'

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I have no further comments or suggestions. It is a very interesting paper!