We Will Not Shut Up and Dribble: LeBron James and the Tripartite Human Being
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper engages with a very important and interesting topic by discussing the “shut up and dribble” episode between the basketball star LeBron James and the Fox News host Laura Ingraham following the critical comments James and his fellow basketball player Kevin Durant made about the US President Donald Trump.
This choice of the subject is very original and the analysis is very suggestive of the relations between political ideology, public political interventions, and racial discourse in contemporary American politics and society. The analysis in the first part of the paper (“Shut Up and Dribble”) is very clear and focuses on the racial connotations of Ingraham’s comments against LeBron and her objections against “leftist” elitist discourse concerning the moral status and the political fate of the US. The next part (“We Will Not Shut Up and Dribble”) is considerably shorter and explains James’ reaction through his activity against racial and social injustice. The third and final part (“The Tripartite Human Being”) is, in my view, the most interesting part of the paper, since it develops the author’s main point by arguing that it is through the theological/religious concept of the “tripartire human being” that we can best understand James’ reaction against the racial comments and the attempt to reduce the Black human being to a soulless and speechless “body”. According to the author(s), “The Christian accounting of the tripartite or trichotomous human being … is the best model (though not perfect) to apply to James’ orientation towards racial injustice in light of those telling him to shut up and dribble” (lines 401-403).
This is a well-written and readable article. Some minor problems to be addressed before publication: a) There is virtually no definition – at least a working one – or even a brief account of what racism theoretically means. A brief discussion of the concept of racism is of primary importance in order to understand the main argument. The author(s) should complement the analysis with some references related to the concept of racism; b) there should be some references on the authors discussed. To give an example: In p. 7, the author(s) discuss(es) Plato’s Phaedo but there is no citation of the text. In pages 8-10, there is a discussion on Freud’s theory without reference to his work. A reference to the appropriate sources is needed here.
Author Response
see attachment
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper is very scholarly and incorporates both primary and secondary research that allows the reader to understand contemporary discourse surrounding sports and politics in a novel and challenging way. The author's positioning of the body as a site of religious and political contestation is original and thought provoking. However, throughout the paper, I kept questioning what the author's broader goal or intention was in doing an exegesis on the sports/racism discourse and what the author's interpretation can illuminate about the broader debate about politics in sports. Is the purpose to more carefully consider the trials and demands on the black body in American entertainment culture? Is it to demonstrate the underlying religious character of a debate that is ostensibly about sports and politics, but in effect is actually about the body and soul in American culture? I believe the reader needs a bit more of an answer to the "so what?" question. The scholarship and writing is fairly strong, though, so this article has merit. I think it simply needs to strengthen its positionality and argument about the broader takeaways.
Author Response
see attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
