Este estudo analisa duas traduções em língua portuguesa da Beloved, de autoria de Toni Morrison, em Português do Brasil, uma de Evelyn Kay Massaro (1994), outra de José Rubens Siqueira (2007). Enfatiza as diferenças e/ou semelhanças entre ambas, a partir de um levantamento preliminar das características do dialeto Black English Vernacular, empregado pela autora, e as respectivas traduções desse dialeto. A comparação do original com as duas traduções processou-se com base em postulados teórico-críticos da Literatura Comparada e dos Estudos de Tradução. Em um primeiro momento, examinam-se seleções específicas do uso das formas do Black English Vernacular em detalhes, a fim de verificar a eficiência neste aspecto em ambas as traduções em Português e mostrar os recursos usados pelos tradutores e os resultados obtidos. Após, emite-se nosso ponto de vista sobre a análise mencionada anteriormente, tentando formular uma hipótese geral sobre os fenômenos observados com reflexões sobre os problemas envolvidos na tradução de dialetos. / This paper analyses two Portuguese translations of Beloved by Toni Morrison into Brazilian Portuguese, made by Evelyn Kay Massaro (1994) and other by José Rubem Siqueira (2007). It emphasizes the differences and/or similarities between them, based on a preliminary investigation whose main focus was the use of Black English Vernacular used by the author and their respective translations. The comparison of the original work with its translations was based on theoretical and critical postulates of Comparative Literature and Translation Studies. At first, specific excerpts of the use of Black English Vernacular forms in the text were selected and examined in detail, in order to establish the efficiency of this aspect in both Portuguese translations and to show the resources used by the translators and the results achieved. In second place, this work presents our point of view about the afore mentioned analysis, trying to formulate a general hypothesis for the observed phenomena. It raises questions about the literary dialects and the problems involved in their translation.

Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:29:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2010-02-24Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T19:18:27Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 pinto_ma_me_sjrp.pdf: 746600 bytes, checksum: 0e3b007b8cfb91086d80f31f409204a7 (MD5) / Os conceitos de rememoração e renembrança são apresentados e definidos nos romances Beloved (1987), da autora norte-americana Toni Morrison, e Desmundo (1996), da autora brasileira Ana Miranda, respectivamente, como processos pertencentes ao fenômeno mnemônico, incorporados ao espaço ficcional para revisar perspectivas históricas nacionais oficiais. Ambos os romances foram elaborados a partir de fatos ocorridos em momentos históricos cruciais da grande narrativa de formação nacional dos Estados Unidos e do Brasil. Beloved resgata o crime cometido pela escrava foragida Margaret Garner, poucos anos antes da Guerra Civil (1861-1865), quando matou a própria filha na tentativa de evitar que suas crianças voltassem para a fazenda onde seriam escravizadas. Desmundo retoma a vivência de uma das órfãs enviadas pelo rei de Portugal à colônia Brasil, no século XVI, para servirem como esposas, a pedido dos padres que esperavam extinguir os hábitos dos colonos de se relacionarem com as índias. A confluência entre memória, história e literatura acontece nesses romances por meio da rememoração e da renembrança que se configuram, ao mesmo tempo, como processos mnemônicos realizados pelas personagens e como estruturas narrativas. A rememoração é definida como a imagem que permanece (individualmente e no mundo) quando algo deixa de existir; a renembrança é originada a partir de experiências singulares e possui relações com um mundo fantasioso. Ambas compartilham características ligadas ao enigma da representação que retoma eventos do passado, tais como a construção paradoxal de ausências e distâncias. Porém, a rememoração possibilita a memória coletiva, enquanto a renembrança ocasiona a memória individual. As estratégias narrativas de cada romance acompanham a caracterização de cada um desses processos, distinguindo-se na constituição da memória... / The concepts of rememory and renembrança are presented and defined in Toni Morrison‟s Beloved (1987) and Ana Miranda‟s Desmundo (1996), respectively, as mnemonic processes incorporated into the fictional space in order to revise official national historical perspectives. The American and the Brazilian novels were both based on facts that took place in crucial historical moments of the master narrative concerning the national formation of each country. Beloved revisits the crime committed by Margaret Garner, a fugitive slave, during the pre-Civil War years, when she killed her own daughter in an attempt to save her children from returning to slavery. Desmundo recollects the experiences of one of the Portuguese orphan girls sent to sixteenth-century colonial Brazil to serve as wives, by orders of the king and by the request of the priests who wanted to put an end to the sexual relations among Portuguese colonialists and natives. Rememory and Renembrança set the interrelations between memory, history and literature because they are the mnemonic processes engendered by the characters and, at the same time, they form the structure of the novels. Rememory is defined as the image that lasts (individually and in the world) when something no longer exists; renembrança originates from singular experiences and establishes relations with a fantasy world. The two processes share features related to the enigma of representation that recaptures past events, such as paradoxical constructions of absences and distances. However, rememory triggers collective memory whereas renembrança belongs to individual memory. The narrative strategies of each novel follow the characteristics of each process, distinguishing themselves in the creation of characters‟ memory and experiences. These differences, though, converge to a common objective of preventing the erasure of the past not only through... (Complete abstract click electronic access below)

Este estudo analisa duas traduções em língua portuguesa da Beloved, de autoria de Toni Morrison, em Português do Brasil, uma de Evelyn Kay Massaro (1994), outra de José Rubens Siqueira (2007). Enfatiza as diferenças e/ou semelhanças entre ambas, a partir de um levantamento preliminar das características do dialeto Black English Vernacular, empregado pela autora, e as respectivas traduções desse dialeto. A comparação do original com as duas traduções processou-se com base em postulados teórico-críticos da Literatura Comparada e dos Estudos de Tradução. Em um primeiro momento, examinam-se seleções específicas do uso das formas do Black English Vernacular em detalhes, a fim de verificar a eficiência neste aspecto em ambas as traduções em Português e mostrar os recursos usados pelos tradutores e os resultados obtidos. Após, emite-se nosso ponto de vista sobre a análise mencionada anteriormente, tentando formular uma hipótese geral sobre os fenômenos observados com reflexões sobre os problemas envolvidos na tradução de dialetos. / This paper analyses two Portuguese translations of Beloved by Toni Morrison into Brazilian Portuguese, made by Evelyn Kay Massaro (1994) and other by José Rubem Siqueira (2007). It emphasizes the differences and/or similarities between them, based on a preliminary investigation whose main focus was the use of Black English Vernacular used by the author and their respective translations. The comparison of the original work with its translations was based on theoretical and critical postulates of Comparative Literature and Translation Studies. At first, specific excerpts of the use of Black English Vernacular forms in the text were selected and examined in detail, in order to establish the efficiency of this aspect in both Portuguese translations and to show the resources used by the translators and the results achieved. In second place, this work presents our point of view about the afore mentioned analysis, trying to formulate a general hypothesis for the observed phenomena. It raises questions about the literary dialects and the problems involved in their translation.

Este estudo analisa duas traduções em língua portuguesa da Beloved, de autoria de Toni Morrison, em Português do Brasil, uma de Evelyn Kay Massaro (1994), outra de José Rubens Siqueira (2007). Enfatiza as diferenças e/ou semelhanças entre ambas, a partir de um levantamento preliminar das características do dialeto Black English Vernacular, empregado pela autora, e as respectivas traduções desse dialeto. A comparação do original com as duas traduções processou-se com base em postulados teórico-críticos da Literatura Comparada e dos Estudos de Tradução. Em um primeiro momento, examinam-se seleções específicas do uso das formas do Black English Vernacular em detalhes, a fim de verificar a eficiência neste aspecto em ambas as traduções em Português e mostrar os recursos usados pelos tradutores e os resultados obtidos. Após, emite-se nosso ponto de vista sobre a análise mencionada anteriormente, tentando formular uma hipótese geral sobre os fenômenos observados com reflexões sobre os problemas envolvidos na tradução de dialetos. / This paper analyses two Portuguese translations of Beloved by Toni Morrison into Brazilian Portuguese, made by Evelyn Kay Massaro (1994) and other by José Rubem Siqueira (2007). It emphasizes the differences and/or similarities between them, based on a preliminary investigation whose main focus was the use of Black English Vernacular used by the author and their respective translations. The comparison of the original work with its translations was based on theoretical and critical postulates of Comparative Literature and Translation Studies. At first, specific excerpts of the use of Black English Vernacular forms in the text were selected and examined in detail, in order to establish the efficiency of this aspect in both Portuguese translations and to show the resources used by the translators and the results achieved. In second place, this work presents our point of view about the afore mentioned analysis, trying to formulate a general hypothesis for the observed phenomena. It raises questions about the literary dialects and the problems involved in their translation.

This thesis focuses on a study of the female voice and silencing as well as on the use of the supernatural in selected works of literature from three different cultures: Isabel Allende's The House of the Spirits, Maxine Hong Kingston's The Woman Warrior, and Toni Morrison's Beloved.

<p>This dissertation explores the philosophical, cultural, and political implications of the discourse on humanity and human subjectivity in the time of the Anthropocene that engages a wide geographic and temporal range. Specifically, I examine the ways in which three selected literary works of Daniel Defoe from England, Toni Morrison from America, and Arundhati Roy from India interact with the intricately contested notions of what it means to be a human being sharing the earth’s natural habitats with another entity traditionally defined as “other,” categorized around species, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, sexuality, class, and even religion.</p><p>I argue that Defoe’s <i>Robinson Crusoe</i>, the allegedly first modern novel, inaugurates the reigning understanding of human being as <i>homo sapiens</i> represented by Crusoe’s rationalized humanity, the essential feature of which has come to engender a threatening condition both for the nonhuman and non-European world; that Morrison’s <i>Paradise</i> and Roy’s <i>The God of Small Things</i> each in their own way not only problematize and challenge the overall tenet of Defoe’s metaphysical rationality in Euro-American and Anglophone cultures, but also investigate a more secular and thereby alternative idea of human subjectivity as <i>homo ecologicus</i>, so as to either (re)construct or restore a vibrant and sustainable community based on a notion of human not as hierarchically superior to “other” entities, but more horizontally and inclusively situated within one larger common habitat called the planet Earth.</p><p>Postulating the conviction that one cannot fully understand the aforementioned alternative conceptualization of human being as <i>homo ecologicus</i> within the confines of divisive identity politics based upon racial, ethnic, national, religious, gender, and sexual orientation categories, it is a pivotal concern of my thesis to bridge the ostensibly unquestioned bifurcation between human beings and Nature: that between the West and the East, that between male and female, that between reason and intuition, and that between knowledge and life. In performing these wider ecological inquiries into radical modes of human existence, I place the core value of nonfoundationalist thoughts of Friedrich Nietzsche, Alfred North Whitehead, Martin Heidegger, Michel Foucault, and Edward Said, among many others, in critical dialogue with the study of literature with a view to thematizing the broader question of how a literary narrative as a historical and cultural institution imaginatively reframes our self-consciousness of the precarious condition of the Anthropocene. In conclusion, I argue that the study of literature and other humanities that valorize a vital interconnectedness between humans, objects, and the environment offers the potential for an inexhaustible and enduring habitat in which <i>homo ecologicus</i> continues to, in the words of Nietzsche, “remain faithful to the earth,” embracing <i>homo sapiens</i>.</p>

This study employs psychoanalytical theories to explore how the conscious, unconscious, and subconscious workings of the mind, combined with a search for identity, are presented and dealt with in Toni Morrison’s novel Beloved (1987). It is done through a close reading and in-depth textual analysis of thematic concerns raised in the work. Previous research has primarily relied on some specific aspects of psychoanalytic theory and applied it to Beloved. The theoretical framework provides a rationale for this paper to research two events in particular that highlight the mother-daughter relationships between Sethe and her Ma’am and between Sethe and her daughter Beloved. These relationships are consequently analyzed by employing psychoanalytical concepts offered by Freud, Lacan and Kristeva. By utilizing psychoanalytical criticism, the characters’ conscious and unconscious motives and feelings are revealed and explained, as well as the meanings and the undercurrents that lie underneath the text’s consciousness. The results suggest that Sethe murdered her daughter Beloved to keep her from becoming a slave and enduring the dreadful and traumatic consequences of slavery, which was similar to what Sethe went through when she was abandoned by her Ma'am. Sethe’s childhood psychological principles and trauma shaped her identity as a mother as she witnessed her mother abandoning her at a young age by being tortured and killed. The events around Sethe’s mother’s death and the fact that Sethe never identifies her mother’s dead body, scar Sethe for life and instill in Sethe a sense of “lack” and an abnormal feeling of maternal love where she is ready to kill her children to save them from the horror of slavery.

Disability and animality have frequently been conjoined in American literature as the limit cases of cognition, language, and narrative. In modern and contemporary fiction, this intersection is not just thematic, but also an opportunity for formal experimentation. My dissertation considers a century-spanning group of authors that includes William Faulkner, Zora Neale Hurston, Toni Morrison, and contemporary disabled writers and artists such as Jillian Weise, Kathy High, and Sharona Franklin. It uses a combination of close reading, historical research, and theoretical analysis to argue that some of the last century’s most influential literary experiments have built upon aesthetic modes associated with both disability and animality. For instance, in The Sound and the Fury, Benjy Compson’s famously associative narration is driven as much by canine-identified sensory tendencies of smell and touch as it is by human cognitive difference, and the folkloric interludes central to Their Eyes Were Watching God are catalyzed by the work-debilitated body of a mule. Few scholars have recognized the extent to which disability and animality are entangled as aesthetic categories, because each field has typically disavowed the other: disability studies makes “full humanity” a goal while assuming the inferiority of nonhumans, and animal studies often elevates nonhuman species by emphasizing their intelligence and physical abilities. My project bridges this impasse by showing how disability and animality come together to push language and literature in new directions, revealing an unrecognized literary tradition in which narratorial capacity, ethical consideration, and even access to the text do not depend on supposedly human-defining abilities like spoken language and written literacy.

The category of life is considered central to the heterogeneous field known as Italian thought or Italian theory. Its centrality helps explain the outsized role that Italian thinkers like Giorgio Agamben, Rosi Braidotti, Roberto Esposito, and Toni Negri play in international conceptualizations of biopolitics. Scholars have attempted to trace the roots of this emphasis on life back to thinkers such as Vico and Croce, Italian Marxist traditions such as workerism, “imports” like Heideggerian ontology and Foucauldian critique, and even Italy’s geography. These histories fail to interrogate the paradox that Italian thought usually deals with life in abstract terms, rather than with real, embodied lives. Styles of Existence, Italy 1961–1982 offers an alternative genealogy of Italian thought that focuses on the role that philology played in transforming conceptions of life and self in postwar Italy. It argues that the poet and filmmaker Pier Paolo Pasolini and art critic and feminist Carla Lonzi show us what living looks like by applying the tools and concepts of interpretation and criticism they acquired as artists and critics to their own lives. It makes the case for their inclusion in the unofficial canon of Italian thought, and for acknowledging the debts that later philosophical treatments of life owe to Pasolini and Lonzi’s existential attempts to overcome the distance between theory and praxis. Pasolini and Lonzi, both well-known for their polemical contributions to debates about politics, gender, and sexuality in Italy’s long 1968, are discussed here together for the first time. Styles of Existence lays out the theoretical tenets, preferred methodologies, and historical arcs of their life philologies, tracing them across an array of sources including diaries, screenplays, television talk shows, and newspaper columns. Both authors’ projects are examined from a comparatist perspective, which means that they are situated in Pasolini and Lonzi’s cultural and discursive contexts as Marxist and feminist intellectuals, respectively, and in relation to contemporaneous domestic and international trends and debates. Responding to a request by Pasolini that his works be read philologically, chapter one proposes a philological rereading of his corpus that takes into account his love for space and dedication to the irrational. Proposing the notion of “lunar hermeneutics” as a conceptual frame, it demonstrates that Pasolini incorporates tools from philology and stylistic criticism in his social critique and filmmaking in response to changing global and national political landscapes in the late 1950s and early 1960s, and especially the developments of the space race. Chapter two elaborates the features of Pasolini’s project of “Marxist linguistics” in the mid-1960s as a political answer to rapid industrialization and globalization, demonstrating that Pasolini expands the scope of lunar hermeneutics with contributions from semiotics and insights from his work as a filmmaker. Close readings of Pasolini’s aesthetic writings in Empirismo eretico (1972) and his film Uccellacci e uccellini (1966) illustrate the importance of cinema to his revised theory of language and understanding of self. Chapter three examines Pasolini’s collection of political writings, Scritti corsari (1975), as an example of Auerbachian-inspired Weltliteratur, showing that the work is designed as a philological exercise dedicated to the critical preservation of human forms of life threatened with extinction. Turning to Lonzi, chapter four provides the first theoretical and historical account of autocoscienza or self-consciousness making, the feminist, relational practice that Lonzi developed with other members of the group Rivolta femminile in the early 1970s. Lonzi formulates autocoscienza as a subversive mediation of critical and postcolonial theory as well as of modern art, and envisions an “unforeseen subject” who refuses to comply with the misogyny and inequalities inherent to prevailing models of liberational subjectivity. Chapter five reassesses Lonzi’s rejection of Hegelian and psychoanalytic theories of recognition, and her engagement with Alexander Kojève’s anthropomorphizing rendition of Hegel, to argue that autocoscienza provides its own affirmative feminist theory and practice of recognition focused on listening and responsiveness among equals. Chapter six considers the diary’s central role in Lonzi’s philological project of self by linking it to autocoscienza and her theory of clitorality. It argues that the sexed dimension of autocoscienza is what makes viable a transition from theory to praxis, and from emphasis on the collective to the self. By focusing on the diary, it restores the contributions of “Sara,” another Rivolta member, and the influence of hagiographical writings on Lonzi’s conception of female freedom. Finally, chapter seven unearths Lonzi’s obsessive “dialogue” with Pasolini in her “feminist diary” Taci, anzi parla [Hush, No Speak] (1978) as a case study in the practice of autocoscienza. Lonzi’s disagreements with Pasolini about culture, sexuality, and women’s rights, and their largely overlapping views on freedom and expression, are situated in the context of Italian debates about abortion in the mid-1970s. This chapter argues that Lonzi’s relation to Pasolini transforms her understanding of self and helps her refine and recalibrate the goals of autocoscienza. In conceiving of the self and selfhood in philological rather than philosophical terms, Pasolini and Lonzi challenge theories of the subject predominant in critical theory and offer precursors to contemporary concepts like Agamben’s homo sacer. Their aesthetics of existence require a reconsideration of the scope of philology in the twentieth century, the parameters of political theory, the legacy and historiography of Italy’s long ’68, and our understanding of what it means to live a meaningful human life. The detailed recovery of Lonzi’s intensive engagement with Pasolini and his work, finally, points to an unlikely source of influence on radical Italian feminism.

No description available.