Josà de Alencar Machado de Assis: a possible realistic dialogue

• Autor(a) principal: Dariana Paula Silva Gadelha
• Data de Publicação: 2014
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da UFC
• Texto Completo: http://www.teses.ufc.br/tde_busca/arquivo.php?codArquivo=11444
• topic: Romantismo; Realismo; Josà de Alencar; Machado de Assis; Romanticism; Realism; Josà de Alencar; Machado de Assis.; LITERATURA COMPARADA

Realism was the aesthetic that opposed the romanticism and advocated a more veristic description of human facts and the customs of the period. However, although attempts are made to separate them tightly, it can be said that both have many factors in common. Following this idea, AfrÃnio Coutinho (1986) argues that realism is better a continuation than an opposition to romanticism, as they bring the man as the central issue. It is understood, therefore, that there is a confluence of characteristics between the aesthetics, because they present more human characters, those with vices and virtues; descriptions in order to provide truth to fiction, in a consistent way to reality; and because of the criticism to society. Thus, one should not consider the currentsas opposed, when in fact they interact and complement each other. In this sense, it is based on the problematic relationship between romanticism and realism that we will seek to establish a comparative analysis between the two most important writers of the period, Josà de Alencar and Machado de Assis, who made history, respectively, in the literary aesthetics aforementioned. Thus, based on the novel Senhora (1875), by Josà de Alencar, and MemÃrias PÃstumas de BrÃs Cubas (1880), by Machado de Assis, we aim to study the realistic traits verified in the mentioned works, thus ascertaining to what extent and how the authors approach and distance themselves, since both the author of Iracema as Dom Casmurroâs one observed, criticized and represented the society of their time, bringing to light ambiguous and densely human characters. It is understood, therefore, that comparative dialogue becomes possible, since both writers did not delimited themselves to literary precepts ofthe currents to which they belonged.