Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2019 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Gill, Claudine Faleiro
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Yokozawa, Solange Fiuza Cardoso
|
| Banca de defesa: |
Yokozawa, Solange Fiuza Cardoso,
Camilo, Vagner,
Pires, Antônio Donizeti,
Assumpção, Albertina Vicentini,
Silva, Célia Sebastiana |
| Tipo de documento: |
Tese
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Federal de Goiás
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Pós-graduação em Letras e Linguística (FL)
|
| Departamento: |
Faculdade de Letras - FL (RG)
|
| País: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
http://repositorio.bc.ufg.br/tede/handle/tede/9503
|
Resumo: |
This thesis investigates the relationship of Armando Freitas Filho and Heleno Godoy, contemporary poets, with the tradition represented by Carlos Drummond de Andrade and João Cabral de Melo Neto. Eliot states that a poetic work is not analyzed in its singularity, but rather, in relation to its predecessors, in a comparative key. From this, we consider two modes of relationship with tradition. The first by conscious influence. For this bias, we analyze how João Cabral influences Freitas Filho and Godoy in what concerns the compositional process of the planned verse, constructed, and based on the objective expression, which consists in banishing the sentimental outpouring. The second is based on a proposal for a relational reading between the contemporary poets and the tradition required by the confluence of personal memory as a theme and the use of irony as a poetic strategy. Freitas Filho and Godoy perceive the compositional process as a construction. We have seen that there is some Praxist content in this influence, but we defend the thesis that João Cabral is the forerunner of Praxis Poetry in what concerns the elaboration of its proposals. We realize that, although there is some conflict with João Cabral, there is no denial of this tradition. On the contrary, it is stated in several interviews by Freitas Filho and Godoy. This does not nullify the desire for overcoming him, which is concretized by the critical dialogue and by the incorporation of the style of João Cabral. In general, Freitas Filho and Godoy in dialogue with Drummond and Cabral reveals, in different nuances, the criticality of this interaction. Both the investigation of influence and the proposal of relational reading between contemporary poets and modernist poets reinforce the understanding that dialogue with tradition is reconfigured at this time. Approaching the prognosis issued by Octavio Paz, who perceived as characteristic of contemporary poetry the “reconciliation between the times” or the birth of a “poetry of convergence”, Freitas Filho and Godoy establish a critical dialogue with their precursors without instituting a break. “Convergence” is revealed in the continuity or approximation of the poetic projects of Drummond and João Cabral. However, whether by the influence or the confluence between them, the dialogue establishes itself tense, that is, the contemporary poets question, face, seek to overcome their references, which they do by incorporating their styles to their verses. |
