Margen y centro : dramaturgia femenina Brasileña contemporánea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this thesis is to give an account of the position taken by certain women dramatists in the context of both box-office success and theatre criticism in Brazil in the latter half of the twentieth century in order to provide a panoramic view of the way the Brazilian theater canon reacts to the work of women authors, by either incorporating it or not, according to political and social circumstances. It is hoped then that a more comprehensive vision of these dramatists will result than that of the traditional academic criticism which either elevates by acceptance or dismisses by ignoring or playing down their work. The production of three dramatists will be analysed here, namely, those plays by Leilah Assuncao, Maria Adelaide Amaral and Isis Baiao which fall into the period 1969--1999, and which exemplify two key tendencies in the Brazilian theatre of the last thirty years. These tendencies are: first, the attempt to widen the traditional horizon of politicized theatre by adding to its socio-political concerns a focus on the individual and his/her particular agenda, and, secondly, the break with any specifically aesthetic or conceptual format on stage in a blurring of the legacies of tradition and the vanguard, in which a "hybridism" of form and language is particularly noticeable in the privileging of a kind of writing that is not bound by formal limits. Such an analysis has made it possible to highlight how determined types of reaction may be altered along the time when different interpretive parameters are used by the critical community and by the public. While a certain sympathy is shown here for the feminist reading of the ideological bases of the literary canon, this is done not only to corroborate the masculine bent of such a canon to the exclusion of the Other, but also to prove that the criteria regulating excellence are products of a specific ideology which changes according to its sociohistorical context. The ultimate goal here is, thus, to make
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".