Comprendre les présupposés qui fondent les rapports au monde des individus selon leur appartenance civilisationnelle nécessite des outils et une méthode permettant de répondre à trois questions principales. D’abord, comment aborder le rapport que des individus et leurs collectivités entretiennent avec le monde et avec l’Autre selon leur propre système d’interprétations et d’explications de ces réalités? Ensuite, comment penser la diversité des collectivités humaines qui établissent de tels rapports? Finalement, comment aborder les dimensions collectives à travers les discours limités d’individus? Deux outils m’ont permis de prendre du recul face à ma subjectivité et d’accéder à un certain niveau de réalité et de validité quant aux faits rapportés et aux résultats atteints. Dans un premier temps, le réseau notionnel articulant les conceptions du monde (Ikenga-Metuh, 1987) comme phénomènes de civilisations (Mauss, 1929) accessibles par l’analyse des représentations sociales (Jodelet, 1997) permet de définir et d’étudier l’interface entre l’individuel et le collectif. Dans un deuxième temps, l’opérationnalisation de la recherche permet de cerner le XVIe siècle comme moment de rencontre propice à l’étude des civilisations andines et occidentales à travers les représentations du Soi espagnol et de l’Autre inca du chroniqueur Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa. Finalement, la méthode d’analyse de discours (Sabourin, 2009) lève le voile sur une grammaire sociale polarisante entre le Soi et l’Autre, laquelle traverse les trois univers de sens (religieux, intellectuel et politique) observés dans le discours de Sarmiento. La mise à jour des positions théologiques, intellectuelles et politiques de l’auteur ouvre à son tour sur les récits et discours collectifs propres aux civilisations occidentales et andines de son époque, et permet un questionnement nouveau : cette polarisation est-elle unique à la localisation sociale de Sarmiento ou constitue-t-elle un phénomène civilisationnel proprement occidental ? / Understanding the assumptions underlying the relationships between individuals and the world according to their civilizational affiliation requires tools and a method to address three main questions. First, how to approach the relationship individuals and their collectivities maintain with the world and with the Other according to their own set of interpretations and meanings of these realities? Second, how to envision the diversity of human collectivities which establish such relations? Finally, how to approach the collective dimensions through limited individual discourse? Two tools enabled me to distance myself from my own subjectiveness and to attain a certain degree of reality and validity as to the stated facts and the achieved results. First, the notional network linking worldviews (Ikenga-Metuh, 1987) as a civilizational phenomenon (Mauss, 1929) accessible through the analysis of social representations (Jodelet, 1997), enables the identification of an interface which can be studied between the individual and the collective. Secondly, research operationalization makes it possible to identify the sixteenth century as a significant crossroad for the study of Western and Andean civilizations through Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa’s representations of the Spanish Self and the Inca Other. Finally, discourse analysis (Sabourin, 2009) unveils a polarizing social grammar between the Self and the Other which involves the three realms of meaning (religious, intellectual and political) observed in Sarmiento’s discourse. The author’s theological, intellectual and political positions thus revealed lead, in turn, to the collective stories and discourses which prevailed in Western and Andean civilizations at the time, and invites a further question: Is this polarization unique to Sarmiento’s social location or does it constitute a truly Western civilizational phenomenon?

Comprendre les présupposés qui fondent les rapports au monde des individus selon leur appartenance civilisationnelle nécessite des outils et une méthode permettant de répondre à trois questions principales. D’abord, comment aborder le rapport que des individus et leurs collectivités entretiennent avec le monde et avec l’Autre selon leur propre système d’interprétations et d’explications de ces réalités? Ensuite, comment penser la diversité des collectivités humaines qui établissent de tels rapports? Finalement, comment aborder les dimensions collectives à travers les discours limités d’individus? Deux outils m’ont permis de prendre du recul face à ma subjectivité et d’accéder à un certain niveau de réalité et de validité quant aux faits rapportés et aux résultats atteints. Dans un premier temps, le réseau notionnel articulant les conceptions du monde (Ikenga-Metuh, 1987) comme phénomènes de civilisations (Mauss, 1929) accessibles par l’analyse des représentations sociales (Jodelet, 1997) permet de définir et d’étudier l’interface entre l’individuel et le collectif. Dans un deuxième temps, l’opérationnalisation de la recherche permet de cerner le XVIe siècle comme moment de rencontre propice à l’étude des civilisations andines et occidentales à travers les représentations du Soi espagnol et de l’Autre inca du chroniqueur Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa. Finalement, la méthode d’analyse de discours (Sabourin, 2009) lève le voile sur une grammaire sociale polarisante entre le Soi et l’Autre, laquelle traverse les trois univers de sens (religieux, intellectuel et politique) observés dans le discours de Sarmiento. La mise à jour des positions théologiques, intellectuelles et politiques de l’auteur ouvre à son tour sur les récits et discours collectifs propres aux civilisations occidentales et andines de son époque, et permet un questionnement nouveau : cette polarisation est-elle unique à la localisation sociale de Sarmiento ou constitue-t-elle un phénomène civilisationnel proprement occidental ? / Understanding the assumptions underlying the relationships between individuals and the world according to their civilizational affiliation requires tools and a method to address three main questions. First, how to approach the relationship individuals and their collectivities maintain with the world and with the Other according to their own set of interpretations and meanings of these realities? Second, how to envision the diversity of human collectivities which establish such relations? Finally, how to approach the collective dimensions through limited individual discourse? Two tools enabled me to distance myself from my own subjectiveness and to attain a certain degree of reality and validity as to the stated facts and the achieved results. First, the notional network linking worldviews (Ikenga-Metuh, 1987) as a civilizational phenomenon (Mauss, 1929) accessible through the analysis of social representations (Jodelet, 1997), enables the identification of an interface which can be studied between the individual and the collective. Secondly, research operationalization makes it possible to identify the sixteenth century as a significant crossroad for the study of Western and Andean civilizations through Pedro Sarmiento de Gamboa’s representations of the Spanish Self and the Inca Other. Finally, discourse analysis (Sabourin, 2009) unveils a polarizing social grammar between the Self and the Other which involves the three realms of meaning (religious, intellectual and political) observed in Sarmiento’s discourse. The author’s theological, intellectual and political positions thus revealed lead, in turn, to the collective stories and discourses which prevailed in Western and Andean civilizations at the time, and invites a further question: Is this polarization unique to Sarmiento’s social location or does it constitute a truly Western civilizational phenomenon?

Orientador: José Alves de Freitas Neto / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-24T02:44:53Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Terlizzi_BrunoPassos_M.pdf: 2154224 bytes, checksum: 0fa6e9d74d1d2d360cece95777f03788 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013 / Resumo: Sendo inicialmente pensado pela "intelectualidade rosista", o conceito de americanismo surgiu como uma espécie de justificativa ideológica dentro do discurso político do governo Rosas, caracterizados pela ideia de que a luta da Confederação Argentina contra as potências européias era a luta pela preservação da própria independência do país, em que a causa argentina expressava diretamente a causa americana, decorrendo na criação de uma polarização em que os que estavam com Rosas eram partidários da causa americana e seus opositores, traidores da independência americana (MYERS 1995). É justamente nesse embate político pela definição do conceito de americanismo que tanto o discurso rosista como as obras políticas de Domingos F. Sarmiento (1811-1888) demonstram estratégias discursivas em torno da definição do conceito e sua utilização como linguagem política. Esta dissertação teve por finalidade analisar as ideias e as linguagens políticas utilizadas por Sarmiento em três obras de sua vasta produção: Facundo (1845), Viajes por Europa, África y América (1846-1847) e Argirópolis (1850). A partir daí, demonstrar as interações de seus modelos explicativos em relação ao seu contexto e à situação política da Confederação Argentina na primeira metade do século XIX, que foi caracterizada pelo período em que Juan Manoel de Rosas governou a província de Buenos Aires, estabelecendo uma paulatina hegemonia da província sobre o resto do país. Além disso, pretendeu-se evidenciar a maneira como o autor "disputou" com os polemistas que sustentavam o regime a definição do conceito de americanismo ou sistema americano, de modo a estabelecer pontos de contato com as concepções de soberania, legitimidade política, e republicanismo dentro dos projetos de nação que eram discutidos no calor das vicissitudes da história política argentina / Abstract: Initially being a concept thought by the rosista intellectuality, the americanismo emerged as an ideological justification inside the Rosas government political discourse, featured by the idea that the struggle of the Argentinean Confederation against the European forces was the fight to preserve the independence itself, and the Argentinean cause expressed the proper American cause, what incurred in a polarization between the Rosa's partisans and its opponents who were considered traitor of the political independence (MYERS 1995). It is right in the middle of this quarrel for the definition of the americanismo concept that both: the Rosas discourse and Domingos F. Sarmiento's (1811-1888) political writings shows their reasoning strategies around the concept and its usage as a political language. This essay has the aim in analyzing the ideas and the political languages used by Sarmiento in three of his wide writing collection: Facundo (1845), Viajes por Europa, África y American (1846-1847) and Argirópolis (1850). Moving forward, the next step is to demonstrate the interactions of his explanatory model towards his context and the political situation of the Argentinean Confederation during the first half of the 19th century, when Juan Manoel de Rosas ruled the Buenos Aires state and stablished a gradual hegemony over the whole country. Besides that, we tried to put in evidence the disputes between the writers that supported the Rosas government and Sarmiento among the concept of americanismo or sistema americano, and by establishing some contact point with other concepts such as sovereignty, political legitimacy and republicanism inside the debates occurred in the heat of the Argentinean political History / Mestrado / Politica, Memoria e Cidade / Mestre em História

El propósito de nuestra investigación es analizar la imagen del París surrealista para luego ver su posterior recepción y variación por parte de Julio Cortázar en Rayuela. Los criterios analíticos de nuestra investigación constan en la importancia de la promenade y la visión en la construcción de la imagen de la ciudad a manera de espacio interior. Para comprender los orígenes e inserción en la tradición por parte de los surrealistas, fue necesario establecer los orígenes de las poéticas urbanas de la ciudad de París a finales del siglo XVIII, comprender el auge de París como tema literario a mediados del siglo XIX, analizar la importancia de la tradición noctámbula y la incidencia de Baudelaire en el París moderno para situar a los surrealistas en su manera de comprender la ciudad como un espacio psíquico e interior. Por último, comprenderemos los distintos elementos surrealistas de la construcción de París en Rayuela de Cortázar gracias a los textos escritos durante su período de interés surrealista (1947-1949) y su posterior variación en Rayuela. / The purpose of our investigation is to analyze the image of Paris forged in four Surrealist texts published between 1926-1928 in order to understand the Surrealist elements that allowed Julio Cortázar to forge his own image of the city in the novel Rayuela. Our analytical criteria are the importance of the regard and the promenade in the construction of the city as an interior and personal space. To understand the importance of the Surrealist production, it was necessary to visit the origins of Paris as a literary text in the late eitheenth century, the importance of the tradition noctámbule in the XIXth century, the incidences of Baudelaire's work regarding the modern Paris and the change of century that allowed the Surrealist movement to understand the city as an interior and psychic space. Through the establishment of certain criteria and images, we analyzed Paris in Cortázar's novel Rayuela as a Surrealist product, even if Cortázar himself never felt as as a Surrealist writer.