O Projeto Literatura de Cordel: o Centro de Referência Cultural do Ceará (1975-1990) entre o folclore e a cultura popular
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to analyze how cordel literature was appropriated by the State of Ceará as a cultural symbol and how it founded the idealization of a state culture by the Ceará Cultural Reference Center (CERES). CERES was an agency linked to the Secretary of Culture of the State of Ceará (SECULT) known for the promotion of records and studies on the artistic manifestations of the so-called Ceará popular culture between 1975 – 1990. CERES was comprised of a group of intellectuals with very diferent backgrounds, among which we highlight Oswald Barroso, Rosemberg Cariry, Roberto Aurélio Lustosa, Edvar Costa, Otávio Menezes and Sylvia Porto Alegre, whose work was developed from two main projects: the Project Artesanato (handcrafts) and the Cordel Literature Project. Through publications launched by the latter, such as Antologia da Literatura de Cordel (1978; 1980), Caderno de Cultura (1979) and Literatura Popular em Questão (1982), we specifically analyzed CERES’s conceptions on the basis of the popular culture in trajectory of the field of folk studies in Ceará. The findings showed that the state agency gradually incorporated the new cultural conceptions of Anthropology, which modified, in a broader way, the theoretical-methodological perspectives of the human and social sciences during the 1970s and 1980s.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".