THIS PAPER AIMS to research historical artistic events such as Theatre and Cinema, theater text Oleanna by David Mamet (1992), as well as the film adaptation (1994) and the stage adaptation Brazilian (1995) by Ulysses Cruz. Through the work and its adaptations is made a detailed analysis of each language and the context in which they were reworked. For this it was necessary to think of the role of the author and theater director and film as well as the aesthetic and thematic choices in making an adaptation, among the questions: who wins materiality in this process? Moreover, among the discussions, such work also focuses the thematic study of the work, involving topics such as: the power, the politically correct, the student-teacher ratio in university and the issue of harassment, which allow us to think in contemporary society while a society increasingly fragmented and individualized, in which conflicts are increasingly evident, particularly the lack of otherness. In this context, where the ideals of social transformation? Where are the utopias? These are some more of the issues present in this work. / O PRESENTE TRABALHO tem como proposta a investigação histórica de manifestações artísticas como o Teatro e o Cinema, através do texto teatral Oleanna de David Mamet (1992), bem como a adaptação cinematográfica (1994) e a adaptação para o palco brasileiro (1995) por Ulysses Cruz. Através da obra e suas adaptações é feita a análise minuciosa de cada linguagem e o contexto em que foram reelaboradas. Para isso foi necessário pensar no papel do autor e diretor teatral e cinematográfico, bem como nas escolhas estéticas e temáticas na feitura de uma adaptação, considerando, entre outras questões: o que ganha materialidade nesse processo? Além disso, o trabalho se debruça também no estudo temático da obra, que envolve temas como: o poder, o politicamente correto, a relação professor-aluno nas universidades e a questão do assédio, que nos permitem pensar na sociedade contemporânea como cada vez mais fragmentada e individualizada, apresentando conflitos cada vez mais evidentes, sobretudo pela falta de alteridade. Nesse contexto, onde estão os ideais de transformação social? Onde estão as utopias? Essas são mais algumas das questões presentes neste trabalho. / Mestre em História

It is my belief that theatre is the telling of stories, and that playwrighting is the creation of those stories. Regardless of the underlying motives (to make the audience think, to make them feel, to offend them or to draw them in,) the core of the theatre world is the storyline. Some critics write of the importance of audience effect and audience reception; after all, a performance can only be so named if at least one person is there to witness it. So much of audience effect is based the storyline itself - that structure of which is created by the power characters have over others. Theatre generalists learn of Aristotle's well-made play structure. Playwrights quickly learn to distinguish between protagonists and antagonists. Actors are routinely taught physicalizations of creating "status" onstage. A plotline is driven by the power that people, circumstances, and even fate exercise over protagonists. Most audience members naturally sympathize with the underdog or victim in a given storyline, and so the submissive or oppressed character becomes (largely) the most integral. By what process, then, is this sense of oppression created in a play? How can oppression/victimization be analyzed with regard to character development? With emerging criticism suggesting that the concept of character is dying, what portrayals of victim have we seen in the late 20th century? What framework can we use to fully understand this complex concept? What are we to see in the future, and how will the concept evolve? In my attempt to answer these questions, I first analyze the definition of "victim" and what categories of victimization exist - the victim of a crime, for example, or the victim of psychological oppression. "Victim" is a word with an extraordinarily complex definition, and so for the purposes of this study, I focus entirely on social victimization - that is, oppression or harm inflicted on a character by their peers or society. I focus on three major elements of this sort of victimization: harm inflicted on a character by another (not by their own actions), harm inflicted despite struggle or protest, and a power or authority endowed on the victimizer by the victim. After defining these elements, I analyze the literary methods by which playwrights can represent or create victimization - blurred lines of authority, expressive text, and the creation of emotion through visual and auditory means. Once the concept of victim is defined and a framework established for viewing it in the theatre, I analyze the victimization of one of American theatre's most famous sufferers - Eugene O'Neill's Yank in The Hairy Ape. To best contextualize this character, I explore the theories of theatre in this time period - reflections of social struggles, the concept of hierarchy, and clearly drawn class lines. I also position The Hairy Ape in its immediate historical and theoretical time period, to understand if O'Neill created a reflection on or of his contemporaries. Finally, I look at the concept of victim through the nonrealistic and nonlinear plays of the 20th century - how it has changed, evolved, or even (as Eleanor Fuchs may suggest) died. I found that my previously established framework for "making victim" has change dramatically to apply to contemporary nonlinear theatre pieces. Through this study, I have found that the lines of victimization and authority are as blurred today in nonrealistic and nonlinear theatre as they were in the seemingly "black and white" dramas of the 1920s and 30s. In my research, I have found the very beginnings of an extraordinarily complex definition of "victim".