Garganta Grita: Arthur Bispo do Rosário e o silenciamento produzido pelos Regimes de Autorização Discursiva

• Ano de defesa: 2019
• Autor(a) principal: Lopes, Davi Moreira
• Orientador(a): Reinaldo, Gabriela Frota
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Palavras-chave em Português: Arthur Bispo do Rosário; Corpo; Silenciamento
• Link de acesso: http://www.repositorio.ufc.br/handle/riufc/50000

How to elaborate a thought about the work of Arthur Bispo do Rosário without strengthening the regime that inferiorizes his knowledge before the traditional models of knowledge production? That is the question that moves this study. In it, the theme of the withdrawal of the insane from social life (FOUCAULT, 1978, 1984, 1997) and its association with the eugenic project in Brazil (SCHWARCZ, 1993; MACIEL, 1999) are approached with the intention of presenting the historical context in which Bispo was hospitalized at Colônia Juliano Moreira, a asylum in Rio de Janeiro. At that time, insanity seemed to be an evil that primarily afflicted black and northeastern women and men. The hospice would be a disguised concentration camp (ARBEX, 2013). In this environment, Bispo created most of his pieces. They would attend a sacred mission. In spite of the divine character that Arthur Bispo do Rosário attributed to his collection, a legitimation of his objects as art began in the 1980s (CORPAS, 2016). Several are the agents involved in the process that claims to the artistic sphere the creations of psychiatric patients (ZOLBERG, 2015). Aware that other discourses - medical, curatorial, and academic - have for years overlapped the voice of Bispo do Rosário, this research sought alternatives to thoses research practices that have been engaged in the perpetuation of the exclusive discursive authorization scheme. In this sense, theoretical proposals have been proposed which value a return of the body to the knowledge industry (GROSZ, 2000; BORGES, 2009; ROLNIK, 2011). Added to them, an epistemological repertoire less committed to the models that authorize the speech of one group while silencing the one of another (FANON, 1968; KILOMBA, 2010; MATTIUZZI, 2016; MOMBAÇA, 2016; RIBEIRO, 2017) is presented.