Resumo não disponível

Resumo não disponível

Dans les oeuvres de la tétralogie de la Gândara de Carlos de Oliveira, tout se passe comme si l’auteur,l’autorité narrative ou quelque intelligence démiurgique eût ouvert, dès Casa na Duna, une abominable Boîtede Pandore d’où s’échapperaient des incantations maléfiques aussitôt dissoutes dans une écriture brouillée. Lesdifférentes catégories narratives du récit se présentent ainsi comme autant d’édifices voués à la dégradationpar l’effet pernicieux de la temporalité. Parleuse de sortilèges, l’écriture de la tétralogie appelle la médiation del’interprète, seule capable d’exorciser ses funestes desseins. Voici toute la poignante ironie dont est constelléel’écriture de Carlos de Oliveira, portée par des artefacts ludiques : jeux de temps, d’actants, jeux d’espace, devie et de mort, dans lesquels la promesse d’une décadence universelle miroite ses augures. Ce travail tente dedéchiffrer sur un mode à la fois sémiotique, symbolique et psychocritique, le mécanisme des schèmes du déclinen se recommandant des thèses de Phillip Hamon sur le statut sémiologique du personnage, des théoriescratyléennes sur l’onomastique, des hypothèses de Durand et de Malebranche relatives à la phobie dumouvement indiscipliné ou encore des réflexions de Ricoeur sur les stratégies de l’utopie. / In the works of the tetralogy of gândara of Carlos de Oliveira, everything happens as if the author – thenarrative authority, or some other demiurgic intelligence – had opened since Casa na Duna, a terriblePandora’s Box from which escape evil incantations immediately dissolved in a blurred writing. The narrativecategories are buildings dedicated to degradation by the pernicious effects of temporality. Spells, writing of thetetralogy of gândara speaker calls the divinatrice mediation of the interpreter, only able to exorcise his evildesigns. Here is the poignant irony which is capable writing of Carlos de Oliveira, proclaimed forcefully andworn by playful artefacts: time, actants games, space games, life and death, in which the promise of a universaldecadence shines his omens. This work analyzes in a mode both semiotics, symbolic and allegorical, themechanism of the schemes of the decline. We resort Phillip Hamon these on the semiotic status of thecharacter, cratyl’s theories on onomastic, the phobia of the indiscipline movement of Durand and Malebrancheassumptions, and also Ricoeur reflections on the strategies of utopia.

This dissertation takes as its starting point the claim made by Plato in the Theaetetus that wonder is the origin of philosophy. The aim of the dissertation is to understand this claim and to propose a reading of Plato’s dialogues which shows that this claim applies to at least two kinds of philosophical act, though in different ways. We accomplish this aim through a thorough examination of cross-examination and contemplation as distinct acts of philosophy and through an examination of where and how the notion of wonder appears and operates in these philosophical contexts. In the end, we see two distinct kinds of philosophical wonder (aporetic wonder and contemplative wonder), each corresponding to a distinct philosophical act, and each complying with Plato’s claim about wonder in different but complimentary ways. Aporetic wonder arises within a subject as the result of cross-examination, and contemplative wonder arises when the philosopher is confronted by the wonderful objects of contemplation (i.e., the forms).

The poems in Greg Williamson's 2008 sonnet sequence, A Most Marvelous Piece of Luck, all turn toward imagined experiences of death, skirting the line between life and death and illustrating the boundary that one crosses but cannot experience—the liminal, aporetic boundary that occurs at the moment of until (the word marking the turn of each sonnet in Williamson's collection). Throughout this sequence, Williamson also examines the idea of death and its implications for the writer, examining the problematized situation of life after death. In my own collection, Assemblage, I attempt to examine the liminal as well, looking at death in several poems, but also looking at the way one uses the past in understanding the present and the present in understanding the future.

[pt] Sexto Empírico não fala de dúvida, e não faz uso deste conceito em sua clássica descrição do cético pirrônico. No entanto, desde a sua redescoberta na década de 1430 no contexto do humanismo florentino e até os dias atuais, o ceticismo é interpretado através da dúvida. Na presente tese, primeiramente mostramos que não há uma conexão direta entre o ceticismo pirrônico e o conceito de dúvida. Em seguida, analisamos alguns dos modos pelos quais a dúvida é introduzida no ceticismo, particularmente no período que vai do início do século XV ao final do século XVI, conhecido como ceticismo renascentista. Sexto Empírico não fala de dúvida, e não faz uso deste conceito em sua clássica descrição do cético pirrônico. No entanto, desde a sua redescoberta na década de 1430 no contexto do humanismo florentino e até os dias atuais, o ceticismo é interpretado através da dúvida. Na presente tese, primeiramente mostramos que não há uma conexão direta entre o ceticismo pirrônico e o conceito de dúvida. Em seguida, analisamos alguns dos modos pelos quais a dúvida é introduzida no ceticismo, particularmente no período que vai do início do século XV ao final do século XVI, conhecido como ceticismo renascentista. / [en] Sextus Empiricus does not speak of doubt, nor does he use this concept in his exposition of Pyrrhonian skepticism. However, since its rediscovery in the 1430s to the present day, skepticism has been interpreted through the concept of doubt. In the present thesis, we showed first that there is no explicit connection between Pyrrhonian skepticism and doubt. Then, we analyzed some ways through which the concept of doubt was introduced into skepticism, especially in the period from the beginning of the 15th to the end of the 16th century, known as Renaissance skepticism.

Cet écrit traverse l'encre de la peinture par la sienne propre. Elle a ce corps en partage, à la fois fraternel et inconciliable. L'encre de l'écrit a voulu ici se frayer un chemin de liquidité dans la peinture, donnant à son mouvement l'ébranlement de la couleur, qui est un geste de la matière elle-même. Mon geste, lui, bu par le papier et retiré dans des plis de vagues, opère un glissement jusqu'au blanc d'une page sur la table qui se déploie jusqu'à cet objet singulier qu'est la thèse en arts. De fait, comme la peinture accompagne dans son sillage d'ombres le questionnement d'un regard, son itinéraire sans tracé, l'écrit depuis la peinture, se retourne sur son propre objet — d'une encre à l'autre. La construction d'une parole en prise avec une errance d'atelier est délicate. Elle mêle son corps résonant d'images à celui des mots des poètes, travaillant un langage inconnu au creux de l'impasse même que constituent les mots, la prise de parole. La voix du peintre est la seule que je connaisse. Elle est issue de l'abandon et du dessaisissement à l’œuvre. Elle engage la pensée dans le faire, au milieu d'une déposition qui est celle, multiple, d'un corps d'encre, d'une peinture en éclat, d'un geste et sa dépose, d'une voix et de ses fragments. La déposition appelle le sol. C'est bien de ce sol dont il est question tout au long de cet écrit. Un fondement, comme fondation mais aussi comme ce qui fond sous les pas. Liquide, fluide, mouvante. Une déprise qui est aussi un ancrage, une attache qui est aussi un débord. / This writing goes through the ink of painting through its own. It has this body to share, both fraternal and irreconcilable. Here the ink of writing sought to pave a liquid way in painting, giving to its movement the trembling of color, which is a gesture of matter itself. As for my gesture, drunk by the paper and withdrawn in folds of waves, operates a drift to the white of a page on the table, that unfolds to this singular object that is the thesis in fine arts. In fact, as painting accompanies in its shadowy wake the questioning of a gaze, its course without outline, writing from painting, turns on its own object - from one ink to another. The construction of a discourse in touch with the wandering of the studio is delicate. It merges its body resonant with images with that of words from poets, working an unknown language in the very core of the impasse that constitutes words, access to speech. The painter's voice is the only one I know. It is the result of the abandonment and divestment at work. It engages thought in making, in the midst of a deposition which is, multiple, that of a body of ink, of a radiant painting, of a gesture and its removal, of a voice and its fragments. Deposition calls for the ground. It is that very ground that is being discussed throughout this writing. A grounding, as foundation but also as what melts under the steps. Liquid, fluid, moving. A release that is also an anchor, a tie that is also an overflow.

Victory Garden, Stuart Moulthrop’s 1991 classic hyperfiction, presents a nonlinear story of U. S. home front involvement in the First Gulf War in a way that facilitates confusion and mimics a "fog of war" sort of (un)awareness. Using Storyspace to build his complex narrative, Moulthrop incorporates poetry, fiction, historical references, and low-tech graphic novel type elements. Among the graphic components are all-black and all-white screens that function as variables. Overtly, these screens speak of closure and signify unconsciousness; however, their nonverbal role may also be linked to the ineffability trope as used by Dante Alighieri and re-interpreted by contemporary linguist Ruiging Liang. To date, critics and meta-readers have incorrectly assumed that the protagonist, Emily Runbird, becomes a fatality. By failing to read her life or death as undecidable, we deny the fiction its full power as a postmodern interpretive dilemma. This assumption plays into what might be posited as Moulthrop’s real thesis: syllogism in a corrupted (war time) information system is potentially tragic. A summary of theories and critical approaches relevant to the blank screen’s use as interstice together with sample engagements with relevant texts—reading Victory Garden, as per Wolfgang Iser’s phenomenological approach, Stanley Fish’s reader response theory, and Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction—prove Victory Garden, to be a challenging but consistent literary breakdown (staged malfunction of reading habits). Ultimately, ineffability is shown to be a reading strategy and the action Aristotle characterizes as key to the definition of tragedy is seen as performed by the reader. Moulthrop dangles the question about Emily’s demise as a critical reading moment prone to corruption. The classical anagnorisis is not Emily’s; the revelation Moulthrop intends is reserved for the reader and is precipitated by the need to resolve aporia.

Resumo não disponível

Resumo não disponível