| dc.description.abstract | This thesis is based on nine events, held between 2014 and 2016, that were devoted to the discussion about the treatment conferred by the public power of Belo Horizonte to the pixação and the pixadores. The events, held in different spaces, with different proposals and formats and organized by different subjects, groups, or institutions, had in common the public appearance and the participation of pixadores, who publicly assumed such identity - defined legally as criminal - and took the floor to express their own narratives about the pixação. In this movement, these subjects have often questioned perspectives and data provided by representatives of the legislative, executive, or judicial public authority (or before them).
From this context, the research aims at dissensually assembling the communication and political scene of the debate about the treatment given to the acts of pixação by the public power of Belo Horizonte. This work takes as singularity the public appearance and the participation of the pixadores in processes of discussion, trying to reflect, from this process, also on the dialogues / negotiations that they establish with other subjects in these contexts, with attention to the ways of its enrollment and engagement in this scene and to the dispute of senses and knowledge about the pixação and its relation with the city. The thesis is organized in two main moments: the first, methodological construction; the second, working with the research data.
The methodological construction is based on an articulation between the concepts of the scene of dissensus (RANCIÈRE, 1996a, 2009a, 2009b, 2018) and arrangements (FOUCAULT, 1994, DELEUZE, [1989] 2001), especially since its appropriation by Braga 2001a; 2010b; 2011; 2012; 2018) for the formulation of the notions of “interactional arrangements” and “dispositional arrangements”. This articulation results in the proposition of a “dissensual dispositional arrangement” as a method of equality that enables us to take a look at the communicational and political potential of that reality, identifying the elements that shape it and the relationships that they establish to then dispose them dissentingly, ignoring the hierarchical determinations that define what in this scenario must be taken as important and legitimate.
In the work with the data, in a first moment, a descriptive reconstitution of the events is made, understanding them like interactional devices and creating a common ground of observation that allows to verify both the regularities that appear in those arrangements as well as their peculiarities. Secondly, these arrangements are disassembled and rearranged dissensually from the thematic excerpts identified in the expressions of the pixadores themselves – speech, music, writing – and the exploration of the senses and the relations they establish with the other elements and subjects that configure the scene. Theories are triggered not as a basis for the analysis or interpretation of an object, but in a (controversial) dialogue with the expressions of those subjects. | |
