Talk:Gustavo Barroso

Untitled
Can someone provide another source of information rather than use only a single source? That would be  excellent. --A little mollusk (talk) 18:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm working on it, although my lack of Portuguese is a bit of a hindrance. Leave it with me. Keresaspa (talk) 15:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your efforts and understand. It was a suggestion. Perhaps there's something in Spanish as well? Can we flag the article to get that sort of help? Curious. A little mollusk (talk) 19:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Help is on the way! I found that a page on Barroso exists on the Portuguese-language wiki, and have requested translation assistance! Yay! A little mollusk (talk) 19:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed ostensibly sourced text: Barroso as Neorealist, Jorge Amado as "modernist"
"Barroso was often linked in with the neorealist school of Brazilian literature, although he differed from the neorealism typified by the likes of Erico Verissimo, Amando Fontes and Telmo Vergara by his emphasis on rural rather than urban settings"

"Barroso belonged to the regionalist documentary strand of Brazilian neorealism, although, along with Mário Sete, he rejected the modernism inherent in the works of contemporaries in the genre such as Jorge Luis de Rêgo and Jorge Amado."

I had put a verify source tag as per the documentation at Template:Verify source "Use this inline template tag to label ostensibly sourced text which appears doubtful or false, and to request source verification." - Source verification I understood to be checking the source to see if the quote is really there, it is ostensively sources, but nevertheless doubtful, contradicts what I understand.

To be clear from what I understand Barroso would be regionalist but not Neorealist, and Jorge Amado would not be modernist. So quite a bit in the "ostensively sourced text" seems doubtful to me. I would just remove it with new sources adequately describing the facts as sources seem to show them - google books searches {"gustavo barroso" neorealismo} gives 4 hits, none applicable. And {"gustavo barroso" regionalismo} gives 591 hits, with I'm guessing maybe half applicable (regionalisms are varied, not only refer to the literary movement). As I understand it "brazilian neorealism" is not a thing at all, not recognized by any literary critic. But as I said, maybe just replacing the text and source later on is fine. --User:Dwarf Kirlston - talk 03:52, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Update: apparently {neo realismo brasileiro}, with a very important space between the prefix and "realismo" does have 71 hits, a significant amount, on google books. So forget about this I guess.--User:Dwarf Kirlston - talk 04:06, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I claim no expertise in this but that's what the source says and it is a WP:RS. It used to be available on Google Books but has been removed; however any decent academic library should be able to order in a copy if you want to confirm that for yourself. I'm not saying there aren't alternative interpretations (and just to reiterate, I have no expertise in Brazilian literature and my only real interest in Barroso is his political career) but if so then add them alongside that one as alternative academic viewpoints, with the requisite reliable sources, noting that scholars have differed over Barroso's literary style. And (once again noting my lack of expertise in the matter) even Amado's article on here describes him as a "Brazilian writer of the modernist school" in its first sentence so it clearly must be a common interpretation of his work. Again, for all I know different opinions of Amado also exist but that article's talk page would be the place to debate that and I wouldn't have any input in that discussion. Keresaspa (talk) 18:26, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * It's nice of you to reply. As I understand it he is classified as "Regionalist" most of all, but the movement is not really very much respected. Even Jorge Amado within literary criticism is considered a lesser author. Jorge Amado would fall under what is sometimes called the "second generation of modernism", which isn't modernist at all in the sense of formal experimentation. Gustavo Barroso is also not really part of the "Geração de 30", because the generation was about social critique, especially marxist leaning. Jorge Amado actually, I don't know if you know, his style is more appropriately called Socialist realism, and he was a member of the communist party - so I would say that there's politics in the literature part as well.--User:Dwarf Kirlston - talk 00:24, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:37, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Gustavo Barroso portrait.jpg