Gestures of Dissimulation. Negotiated Melodrama in Machado de Assis’s Helena (1876)

Authors

  • Marcos Flamínio Peres Departamento de Letras Clássicas e Vernáculas, Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e CiênciasHumanas, Universidade de São Paulo

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21814/diacritica.5143

Keywords:

19th century, Melodrama, Romance, Gesture

Abstract

A novel of the first phase of Machado de Assis´s production, Helena first appealed to the critic for approaching melodrama, a genre of great acceptance in the 19th century, although throughout the 20th century it came to be criticized for not fulfilling the expectations of the gender, especially when conceiving a villain who is far from fully incarnating the polarization between extremes, as good and evil, pure and impure, etc. However, little attention has been paid to the heroine who gives the novel its title, which, although she is read as the typical innocent victim pursued by the malefactor, she has an unacceptable inner conflict for the genre, if we believe in its main scholars (Heilman, Sharp, Brooks). Compromising with the villain, she ends up trying to manipulate characters and plot for her own benefit, seriously jeopardizing the genre's fundamentals. This suggests more than a failure of conception on the part of Machado, but, rather, a deliberate questioning of the genre and of the very nature of the narrative, a question that will be deliberately deepened in his mature novels, such as Dom Casmurro and Esaú and Jacó.

References

Assis, J.M. Machado de. (1998). Helena. São Paulo: Moderna.

Assis, J.M. Machado de. (2012). Esaú e Jacó. São Paulo: Penguin/Companhia das Letras.

Balzac, H. de.(1851). Théorie de la démarche. Paris: Eugène Didier.

Bentley, E. (1965). The life of the drama. London: Methuen.

Booth, M. (1965). English melodrama. London: Herbert Jenkins.

Brooks, P. (1995). The melodramatic imagination: Balzac, James, and the mode of excess. New Haven / London: Yale University Press.

Brooks, P. (2000). Body and voice in melodrama and opera. In M.A. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400866717-008

Smart (Ed.), Siren songs: Representations of gender and sexuality in opera (pp. 118–134). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Dickens, C. (2018). Casa soturna [Bleak house] (O.Mendes, Trad.). Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira.

Dickens, C. (2002). Oliver Twist (Machado de Assis & R. Lísias, Trads.). São Paulo: Hedra.

Eco, U. (1986). Lector in fabula: A cooperação interpretativa nos textos narrativos (A. Cancian, Trad.). São Paulo: Perspectiva.

Eulálio, A. (1992). Escritos. Campinas/São Paulo: Editora da Unicamp/Editora da Unesp. Faria, J.R. (2001). Ideias teatrais: O século XIX no Brasil. São Paulo: Perspectiva. Gomes, E. (1958). Machado de Assis. Rio de Janeiro: Livraria São José. Guimarães, H. S. (2012). Os leitores de Machado de Assis. São Paulo: Edusp/Nankin.

Heilman, R. (1968) Tragedy and melodrama. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Huppes, I. (2000). Melodrama: O gênero e sua permanência. São Paulo: Ateliê Editorial

Mauss, M. (2003). Sociologia e antropologia (P. Neves, Trad.). São Paulo: Cosac & Naify.

Meyer, M. (1998). As mil faces de um herói-canalha e outros ensaios. Rio de Janeiro: Editora UFRJ.

Prado, D. A. (1993). Teatro de Anchieta a Alencar. São Paulo, Perspectiva.

Prendergast, C. (1978). Balzac: Fiction and melodrama. London: Edward Arnold.

Proença, M. C. (1974). Estudos literários (2.ª ed.). Rio de Janeiro: José Olympio/INL.

Sharp, W. (1992). Structure of melodrama. In V. Castellani (Ed.), Melodrama (pp. 269–280). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schwarz, R . (1988). Ao vencedor, as batatas (3.ª ed.). São Paulo: Duas Cidades. Santiago, S. (2000). Uma literatura nos trópicos (2.ª ed.). Rio de Janeiro: Rocco.

Thomasseau, J.-M. (2005). O melodrama (C .Braga & J. Penjon, Trads.). São Paulo: Perspectiva.Zilberman, R. (1989). Estética da recepção e história da literatura. São Paulo: Ática

Published

2023-07-10

How to Cite

Peres, M. F. (2023). Gestures of Dissimulation. Negotiated Melodrama in Machado de Assis’s Helena (1876). Diacrítica, 35(3), 153–168. https://doi.org/10.21814/diacritica.5143