Quando o território desconstrói o mapa: um encontro entre ciências sociais, arte e comunicação.

Abstract

The object of study of this work is the spectacle Agreste and its effects. These pursue the central theme of the work: as the difference is being treated in contemporary society, this encompasses not only the field of research, but also the academic one, since the social sciences are challenged by the study of difference, especially in what refers to the feminist, postcolonial, decolonial, racial and ethnic studies, diasporas, queer, among others that at the turn of postmodernity begin to question how minorities are being represented, reviewing or even rejecting various concepts and perspectives when they reproduce the difference . The process of subjectivation and the forms of interpellations experienced in the scientific fields and in the field of research enter into this discussion in order to problematize the scientific field or even the possible formatting of the subjects of the research, as the thesis proposes to account for the effects of the spectacle , analyzing both social and scientific contexts, both searched symmetrically (LATOUR, 1994). Thus, from the effects of this object (Agreste) it is possible to verify enunciations that evidence certain rational regimes, as well as to perceive erudition as cultural, symbolic, social and economic capitals, and for this reason, the piece is used as the guiding thread , and from its effects we will look at the map-territory relationship that permeates and produces subjectivity. The work seeks to bring mental, theoretical and abstract maps, forms, subjective and habitus (FOUCAULT, 1995; BOURDIEU, 2007) to verify if in the lived or in the territory, these imagistic and discursive representations reach some social dimension, that is, in the social theatricality of everyday life we discover the social odors, the cursed part and for this we rely on the anthropology of the lived that investigates the elements that underlie appearances, forms, maps to see what makes up the territory (MAFFESOLI, 1998). We also reappropriate ourselves from the perspective of the affected person who uses participation as a form of knowledge (FAVRET-SAADA, 2009), both in the social and academic context, in which these experiences as a spectator and researcher are used to emit the paradoxes, whose effects of the spectacle have emerged as a means to analyze how gender, generation, race, income / class, sexuality are taken in the theoretical field and the field of research, so that we will intersect these social markers of difference from data collected in the latter field. This experiential course, starting from and in contact with the piece, goes into analysis to discuss the production of subjectivities and to reflect how science and the researcher are essential parts that generate regimes of rationalities (FOUCAULT, 2003) that also refer the majority of the public interviewed, that is, reproduce discourses / maps that do not always reach the territory, but we go to him to understand the paradoxes of this sociality, that is, to verify which are the elements that form the social and elucidate us questions on the subject of thesis. In this way we try to perceive not only what should be - this represented by the speeches, forms, appearances, maps, theories - to see how they are in the lived, that is, what are the practices and actions, in this relation one can verify the contradictions in which the difference has been made. This work also uses a communication that intends to make of the thesis an agent of cultural mediation, that is to say that between a transmitter that elaborates and a receiver that reelaborates, from the reading they recognize the same or different, but that they are part (singular) of the same process: the society.