Verification and Establishment of Techniques of Ajami Artwork

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article considers Ajami art and seeks to present a comprehensive description on the methods of its creation for the benefit of future artisans and to promote the art form more generally. Since this is an artisanal technique that is in decline and under external pressures in contemporary Syria, this seems like a noble goal and the author meets the challenge admirably. The detailed description and figures provide invaluable detail on the production of Ajami art. There are a few passages in the text that require editing and I address those below but this piece is well-written in general. One addition that would make this a stronger piece is to show photos of masterpieces of Ajami art in situ. In other words, since the author is interested in promoting the value of this art form and achieving greater recognition for it, it would be beneficial to show some excellent examples of Ajami art in the introduction or the literature review when various rooms are discussed. At the end of the demonstration, there is a wonderful example of a completed Ajami painting, but one or two photographs at the beginning of the article would generate the reader's interest for this art form that deserves to be known better.

There are some textual issues in section 4.1.3 that need attention:

Line 318: One sentence simply says: "The value of an Ajami piece of art over the years." what is the author trying to explain here? It is not clear.

Line 323: the author uses the word "elected", I believe they mean to say "selected"

Lines 344-346: The author compares Ajami art to abstract painting and suggests it is a perfect artistic production of various civilizations that occupied Syria over the centuries. Both of these claims should be explained more fully. The point about how Ajami art reflects Syria's history and various intersecting cultures is very interesting but requires elaboration. While the author has been very clear on the technical terms and issues, this historical dimension has not been developed enough.

Line 371: The author uses the term "plywood" which I am not sure is correct. Based on the photos provided it seems to be maybe a wood panel. Plywood is a manufactured form of wood, with thin layers built up with wood grain in opposite direction (not the same as MDF). Anyway, I wonder if indeed artists use plywood since this is a modern product but this is more a technical question.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English is strong overall, but some copy editing is needed here--occasionally there are incorrect words or forms, like the elected/selected example above.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

I hope this letter finds you well and in good spirits.

First and foremost, I extend my heartfelt gratitude to you for your diligent efforts and comprehensive feedback. Your insightful comments have been invaluable in guiding me through the revision process of my article. I have carefully incorporated your suggestions, and I'm pleased to share the revised version with you, along with the attached comments for your perusal.

Your dedication to providing constructive criticism has truly enhanced the quality of my work, and for that, I am immensely grateful.

Once again, thank you very much for your time and support. Your expertise and guidance have been instrumental in refining my article, and I sincerely appreciate your assistance.

Warm regards

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is well written and the main ideas are clearly stated and well detailed. The analysed technique is really interesting and the publication of the article will contribute to its international knowledge and will help to its preservation, achieving the main goal of the article.

Although the text is in general well written, there are several issues that should be taken into account before its publication:

1. I consider that the term "Umayyad" should be unified (in p.1, line 32, it is written as "Omayyad").

2. I think it could be better to provide the name of the Syrian artisan at the beginning of section 3.2, and not only in table 2.

3. Sections 3.3 and 3.4 have the same title. Maybe they could be unified.

4. The term al-Kalphona in Arabic, in line 217, is written backwards, as well as the most of Arabic terms in section 4.1.2 (lines 247, 249, 251, 252, 259, 265, 277).

5. I consider that it would be necessary to change numbers of the chapters in Figure 18 (all of them are “Chapter 1”).

6. In the final bibliography, there are some symbols in lines 638 and 639 that cannot be read.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

I hope this letter finds you well and in good spirits.

First and foremost, I extend my heartfelt gratitude to you for your diligent efforts and comprehensive feedback. Your insightful comments have been invaluable in guiding me through the revision process of my article. I have carefully incorporated your suggestions, and I'm pleased to share the revised version with you, along with the attached comments for your perusal.

Your dedication to providing constructive criticism has truly enhanced the quality of my work, and for that, I am immensely grateful.

Once again, thank you very much for your time and support. Your expertise and guidance have been instrumental in refining my article, and I sincerely appreciate your assistance.

I will be very happy if you agree to sign the report after you look into the new version of the article. 

Warm regards

Author Response File: Author Response.docx