O JORNAL COMO TRIBUNA: UMA POLÊMICA LITERÁRIA NAS “BALAS DE ESTALO”THE NEWSPAPER AS TRIBUNE: A LITERARY POLEMIC IN “BALAS DE ESTALO”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RESUMO: O presente trabalho propõe a realização de uma leitura do jornal brasileiro do último quartel do século XIX enquanto plataforma de debate público, abordando especificamente o caso da Gazeta de noticias. Para tanto, são analisados dois conjuntos de textos: a polêmica literária travada por Silvio Romero e Valentim Magalhães em 1884, cujos textos foram publicados, respectivamente, n’A Folha nova e na Gazeta de noticias, e a paródia de polêmica desenvolvida paralelamente pelos pseudônimos Lulu Sênior e Zig-Zag – correspondendo, respectivamente, aos autores empíricos Ferreira de Araújo e Henrique Chaves – na série “Balas de estalo”. Com isso, pretende-se observar, primeiramente, a representatividade da prática da polêmica nesse contexto, relacionando-a com a ideia de um discurso polêmico entranhado na experiência brasileira. Em uma visada mais específica, levantamos a hipótese de que a função dos pseudônimos da série “Balas de estalo” varia conforme uma conveniência de procedimentos por parte dos autores empíricos, oscilando entre a simples assinatura e o personagem-narrador ficcionalmente, apresentando diversos gradientes de investimento e elaboração ficcionais conforme o objeto e/ou temática abordados no texto.PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Lulu Sênior. Zig-Zag. Polêmica literária. “Balas de estalo”. Gazeta de noticias. ABSTRACT: This paper aims to accomplish a reading of the Brazilian newspaper of the last quarter of the 19th century as a platform for public debate, specifically approaching the case of Gazeta de noticias. To this purpose, we analyzed the 1884 literary polemic between Silvio Romero and Valentim Magalhães, whose texts were published in A Folha nova and Gazeta de noticias, respectively. In addition, we studied the parody of polemic made by the pseudonyms Lulu Sênior and Zig-Zag – corresponding to the empiric authors Ferreira de Araújo and Henrique Chaves, respectively – in the section “Balas de estalo”. This way, we intended to not only observe the representativeness of the practice of polemics in the news context, but also relate it with the idea of a polemic discourse deep-rooted in the Brazilian experience. On a more specific approach, we have hypothesized that the function of pseudonyms in “Balas de estalo” varies according to a convenience of procedures taken by the empiric authors. Oscillating between the signature and the fictionally constituted character-narrator, these pseudonyms presented several nuances of fictional elaboration according to the object and/or theme of the text.KEYWORDS: Lulu Sênior. Zig-Zag. Literary polemic. “Balas de estalo”. Gazeta de noticias.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".