Understanding Intangible Culture Heritage Preservation via Analyzing Inhabitants’ Garments of Early 19th Century in Weld Quay, Malaysia

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Having said that the topic could be interesting, the structure built around the investigation is extremely weak.

The considerations between tangible and intangible are often confused.

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions given by all reviewers have been addressed. Please find the rebuttal in the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. As one of the world cultural heritage recognized by UNESCO, Weld Quay, belonging to George Town, has received a lot of attention. According to the website “The George Town UNESCO Word Heritage Site”, with the support of UNESCO, the intangible cultural heritage of George Town has been investigated since 2012, and household surveys of 5,000 premises have been conducted; in addition, a community-based intangible cultural heritage inventorying has been started in 2019. Although it is not clear whether the results of the above two surveys cover the garments of different local ethnic groups, the author is advised to inquire and refer to it.

2. This article has combined use of visual data analysis and interview analysis, which is a feasible research method for Weld Quay ethnic garments which lack literature data. However, there are only two informants in the field. It is recommended to explain whether the information obtained has reached the necessary "saturation". For example, Table 2 shows that the two informants rarely mentioned Indian clothing, so it is recommended to find a third or even fourth field informant who is more familiar with Indians in order to complement the narrative of Indian clothing.

3. Table 2 establishes two themes, including garments wore by different ethnic groups in the past life in trading port of Weld Quay, and occupational activities happened in Weld Quay trading port. The former describes the forms, colors, and materials of different ethnic groups, and the latter describes the nature of work and gathering areas of different ethnic groups (and their clans). These descriptions all revealed a wealth of survey results, which are sufficient to describe the daily garments’ characteristics of different ethnic groups in Weld Quay in the 19th century. From the perspective of intangible cultural heritages, the material sources, dyeing methods, clothing makers, production methods, and tailoring tools of these different garments are all worth investigating and understanding. It is recommended that the investigation will be supplemented in the future.

4. In Table 2, there are 3 icons in the penultimate row of p.10 and the first row of p.11. It is recommended to modify it to two. Besides, it is stated on p.11 below Table 2 that Table 2 has 3 themes, but only two are actually seen. Please modify it.

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions given by all reviewers have been addressed. Please find the rebuttal in the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

IIt is a complete and exhaustive study. Perhaps more literature is needed on Previous research carried out since heritage studies have shown the frictions involved in heritage processes linked to the category “Intangible Heritage” and the implicit contradiction in the fact that policies for the safeguarding of intangible heritage often they are promoting its destruction. (Bortolotto, 2016, Hafstein, 2012).

In the process of developing conceptual, normative and heritage management instruments, the notion of "intangible heritage" is relatively recent and involves a series of transformations in the more expanded notions of "authorized heritage discourse", hence the participatory approach of the The study is not only adequate from the point of view of memory and documentation of knowledge, but must also provide elements necessary for its management, linking communities.

This entails a series of problems, on which the study should reflect:
- The required participation in the cataloging processes can lead to a bureaucratic step and, therefore, to the cosmetic use of participation.
- It has served to subsume previous legal categories such as those of ethnological or ethnographic heritage and, at the same time, maintain a division between high and low culture, that is, to provide feedback on the hierarchy of heritage disciplines or typologies.
- The processes of patrimonialization and safeguarding, although they pretend to be dynamic and open to change, de facto promote a certain statism or fossilization, especially aimed at working for cultural tourism and not for the societies themselves.

Perhaps in the conclusions, although the results of the interviews are considered insufficient, they do provide additional information. In this sense, emphasis should be placed on the immaterial dimension, the procedural aspect, the living and changing nature of these heritage, and how it gives prominence to the communities, groups and individuals that are producers, depositories or bearers of that heritage.

Author Response

Comments and suggestions given by all reviewers have been addressed. Please find the rebuttal in the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I appreciate the efforts of the authors to complete and integrate the gaps highlighted in the previous revision. 

Author Response

Thank you for your comments and constructive comments.