Talk:Machado de Assis

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 31 August 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gbloom99.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Deletion of Dom Casmurro section
It is unclear why this is placed on the biography page, unless someone is trying to claim that this is his 'best' or most popular novel; however, it is especially farcical given that the information about the book is factually incorrrect. Tsop 13:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC) On second thoughts, the first paragraph contains biographical information, so I have left that and deleted the subsequent paras. Tsop 13:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Why suppress the comment about Machado de Assis (MA) poetry ? Ok, it was too short to be useful, but it is a long lasting trend among researchers to consider MA's poetry irrelevant, not to mention of bad taste.

--Hgfernan 22:39, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Black" writer
 Harold Bloom calls him the greatest black writer in the history of western literature

Can someone provide a source for this? I am curious about whether that's how Bloom phrased it, since, as is explained in the opening sentence of the "Life" section, Machado de Assis wasn't really black by any definition other than a very narrow-minded, typically United-Statian perspective (and I don't say this as an attack on USians, but it seems to me that only in the US would someone like him ever be considered black). -- tmegapscm 2005-08-12

It would be too exagerated to call him black, but in Brazil he is widely reagarded as a mulatto of the low-middle classes. What is interesting is that in Brazil his skin colour is seldom, if ever, remembered in academy as a black writes in our Cultural Studies. I will later expand the coments of his style, Machado de Assis is not so much attached to Zola, but intensely close to Sterne and his English contemporaries.

-

I think the comment should be put back in because, even he not being black, it is interesting to know the opinion of orlando bloom, even if somewhat a wrong one, because in the US they have a different definition of "black". I remember something about Woody Allen too, if not on this page, on the Bras Cubas one, but it dissapeared, why?


 * "Orlando" Bloom? That's Legolas, I think you mean Harold Bloom! =) 201.81.252.13 23:44, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Machado de Assis died as a white men because he became a important person during slave age in Brazil, and it included close relantionship with the emperor.

He is not even a Mulatto, but a Quadroon because he is the son of a Mulatto father and a Portuguese mother. So it would not be right to label him as Black when he is not even majority African in ancestry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrazilianGuido (talk • contribs) 05:16, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

--Ricardo 23:23, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

We could say, "forget about his color and let's focus on his achievement." But there is a general fashion now to glorify the capabilities of anyone who is of Negro descent. Therefore, unfortunately, his race is a pertinent issue because today it may influence any judgment regarding his writing.Lestrade (talk) 13:45, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Lestrade


 * In Brazil there's no such thing as someone being labeled "black" just because it has ancestors of African-American origin. There's no such thing as hypodescending rule because there are no races considered "dominant" nor "subordinate". There's no "one drop blood" rule.


 * For any means, Machado de Assis is more superficially white than black, since he was what they call a quadroon. I live in Brazil and I never saw a scientist, teacher or Literature authority refering to him as a "black writer". Machado was and will ever be one of the most important Brazilian writers of all time, no matter how much foreign people try to classify him according to an obscure system of belief that tends to overprotects and recognize someone's talent based only on color of skin issues.


 * He wasn't very good writer because he is "black" according to European or American standarts! He wasn't black at all, but, surely, he was a very good writer. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 11:03, 2 July 2010 (UTC)


 * In Brazil, is there a difference between calling people black and calling them Afro-Brazilian? Would the latter term be more widely accepted for Machado? Aristophanes68 (talk) 14:43, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


 * He was not to be labeled Afro-Brazilian since he was not a full bloodied Brazilian of African ancestry. Instead, he was a quadroon and is more accurate to address him as a Euro-Brazilian than Afro-Brazilian.


 * Machado never said that he was a "black writer". Labelling him as "black" or "white" means that someone's trying to expropriate his legacy in benefit of petty racial issues that has nothing to do with his heritage to Brazilian culture. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 11:12, 2 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Can you define "full blooded Brazilian of African ancestry"? I'm not sure if that means "fully black but from Brazil" or if it means "both parents were Brazilian but at least one had African ancestry". I appreciate your point about using the terms "Euro-Brazilian', based on the % of African ancestry, but I think it's rather naive to say that racial issues are "petty" or to imply that calling him "black" or "Afro-Brazilian" somehow diminishes his "heritage to Brazilian culture." Aristophanes68 (talk) 16:36, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Bloom's definition is imbecile. Only in the US are there such prejudices as he expounds. Machado de Assis is a Brazilian writer, PERIOD. There's no such sub-group in Brazilian society as "blacks" or "African-Brazilians" or so. Much the same happens in Italy, my country. To imply that Italians with a dark skin must be something to do with people with a dark skin in other countries, apart from skin similarity, means thinking race (skin color) is more important than ethnicity (or indeed any other feature) in defining an individual. To test the stupidity of doing so you only have to change "black" into "red-haired", "hairy" or "tall and skinny" in Bloom's sentence. It immediately sounds weird. The reason? Red hair, hairiness and a tall, skinny complexion are not linked to any sub-group in the US society. Pan Brerus (talk) 19:06, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

The very essence of Harold Bloom's statement is racist. He is separating black writers from white writers, because he doesn't think black writers are as good. So, you know, you are the best... of your lesser race. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.154.49.18 (talk) 19:52, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * So, state that an author "x" are the best from one group is racism with this group? For example: say that Shaekspeare are the best English author is "because I don't think that English author are good"? Say that authoress "X" are the best woman author is an indicative that I don't believe that woman's are good writers?... Machado de Assis is a black author, that's the truth and during his life and death the society tried to whitewash him. Erick Soares3 (talk) 13:21, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
 * He is the best author from Brazil and acknowledge that he was a black person really create an model for black people in the country. They feel represented.Erick Soares3 (talk) 13:27, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

IPA Transcription of name
Is there any particular justification for the dialect that's represented in the IPA transcription that's used here? It seems to me to represent a pretty strongly continental dialect of Portuguese. Also, isn't it  ɐs'iʃ rather than 'ɐsiʃ ? --babbage 08:27, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I have changed the transcription to amore modern Carioca one. Macgreco 13:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Expansion
At least some information on his major works should be included, instead of focusing exclusively on Dom Casmurro. Someone more knowledgeable on literature should add something on style, period, etc.Macgreco 13:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

JohnManuel
JohnManuel, feel free to add the photo if it satisfies Wikipedia guidelines. Be careful with your other edits, however, most of which introduce grammatical errors and/or are tendentious. --Jbmurray 21:31, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

JBmurray
I do not enjoy the time that you seem to have and enjoying under or over your hands: the photo was and is in commons, now why you revert my efforts to put the photo?, that has cost time, to first uploaded and second coded into the page. is the way that you show respect or I am your punching bag? Why you call my username? Are you want to attack me personally? that is your real intention? Please, you have been warm once. You have been giving enough time to reflect on your misdeeds or mistakes. Now I asking politely to change your behavior, I have assuming good faith, and I never dare to change they way you feel or think, but if you are doing this for hidden reasons and far from the aims, policies and the mission of Wikipedia; you will soon find out that you won't past the test of time, and as many friends that you might have around here, it will be many users that believe in this project, and besides of respecting the policies they have the official power to enforce them when the case requires to do so, as you know very well. I am asking you not to delete anything without consensus. Meaning if you see a photo, doubt about it but ask first before to take it out because only it is from your favorite antagonist JohnManuel, the one that is doing what you think you should be doing in the first palce and in the way that fit your interpretations. I don't mind your editions, I am looking for all of them, but only if they do not erase important facts and respect the semantics of the content intended. But let us analyze a bit, as we should:


 * The Photo depicts clearly the fact that Machado was a mulatto,


 * Have you heard that word before? If you are using the word Black, in instead of afro-Brazilian or afro-American, why no use an English word created to specify what Mr. Machado de Assis really was in terms of his race? even better, is we are not interested to be precise or at to the point, lets that alone and no mention nothing about his race at all.


 * May be you are from mars, but the English version of Wikipedia, is read by many English speakers, those from Africa, Australia, England (OxfBrige they say that it is the best English flavor of them all)Ireland, Scotland, should I continue? You are editing for all of them, no for you little professor, teacher or town. Perhaps you are an exacerbated creationist, and from the schools you need to put all who teach Darwinism under your feet? Consider if the word exist and in use in other countries. Wikipedia as English are universal, i.e. both need to express an universal understanding: No mine, no yours, neither an American, if not represent the universal concepts in the most neutral way. So those things that has been written: "...in that region they consider this or that." do not apply if we are no applying or including other point of view as well. It is better no apply neither them. As you have revised some history, American culture is based and assembled from many cultures. Incidentally, an encyclopedia is not about those cultures, it it about knowledge about but exempt from cultures or superstitions.


 * Now, there are many similar projects than this one, for instance, "Enciclopedia Libre" o El, the founder departed from this encyclopedia, because the attitude of many people, they wrote within other principles: "There is any culture better than others", now do you believe in this, and if you don't believe in this, can you articulate why you don't? I hope you are no a racist or a self-loathing individual, but in case you were, could you be intrepid enough to let us know? I don't think so. But even if you were one of those supremacists it doesn't eliminate your right to be in Wikipedia to the extend that you don't imposed your POVs.


 * I even applauded your stamina and enthusiasm, but your lack of empathy and concern for the effort of others or the way that you are calling names all over the discussion pages, What is that? seems to be based on erroneous assumptions. I don't mind that you are spending your time editing. I mind the way you are dealing with other people's contributions, you are treating others as you were the non plus ultra, which as far as I know in Wikipedia there are none or very very few of them.


 * Please let no call usernames on entries' discussion pages, for shedding light in somebody else's mistakes and highlighting your "enormous" contributions and efforts. Those are inflammatory personal attacks, and you know it.


 * There is another case you are doing this to provoke discussions or edit wars which is shameful, and because you have a lot o time then you want to make others waste theirs. If that is the case, I have already warm you, at you user talk page, and that was my last.

A Map for Collaboration
In conclusion, having writing what I have wrote for the user jbmurray, I think that out of you obstinate posture we can build a collaborative effort, for seeking a consensus and to be in consensus there is a need for different opinions, for once we have differences, even our idiosyncrasies could be opposite, but this I started to doubt it, I see them compatible to the extent in which we can sustain an open dialog in which learning and improving the Wikipedia shall be the primary objective. However, lets finish this at once, I don't have time and you as I, want to enjoy the Wikipedia. Here the objectives for this particular case and could serve as a model for other editing interactions:


 * I going to fix one thing a the time.
 * Before you change it, if you thing that should be change you write a small sentence what and why you think it should be changed.
 * Perhaps your changes will be sound solid enough and I will accept them all, but
 * In case I do not accept your changes then, we look for a third party opinion or more and we seek for consensus beyond us
 * Regardless, who, the consensus, no cabal, will rule and should be accepted by both, even more we leave the case to the consensus and continue working in other issues.

Then as practicing, I would take my time again and I will put that photo back in some place in this page, you perhaps want to probe it: Is this photo following the licensing? or is this photo depicting the person, in this case Machado? and so and so on and everything you want to know and that you might want to consider a threat no for you views but for the content verifiability and neutrality. Then before you acting you will consult in this discussion page your views and your arguments if any, without, please mentioning names, depersonalizing the content, you shall explain that you would like to intent to do this or that or even nothing, i.e. that is OK that is nothing and we should move to the next edition or moving to collaborate to other topic for a while, giving it a rest, it is also useful.

If you do this this time, you will do it for the rest of the times, as I do it now, when I see that there are so many things in doubt or need to be referenced or changed in a page. I go to explain it into its discussion page.

I believe, if we do this we will be able to produce much more in no time, I am not imposing, I am sharing this view because I want you to know I have nothing personal against you or anybody, however we need to coordinate and we need to put our eyes entirely in the tasks ahead.

'''Lastly, I am preparing a very interesting project, in which I think you would like to be involved with, because it deals with a very important subject, which have not been documented until now in Wikipedia, even I have the fear that anybody will do so at any time. It is current, involves the past and it is scientific and has been published by authorized sources. We need multimedia capabilities, maps, diagrams, tables, photos, geographical information. I am dropping this in here because time constrains. Well let me know what do you think.'' I will drop a short notice at your talk page, so lets go to ramble...! John Manuel -&quot;-Todos Llegan de Noche, todos se van de día&quot; 21:52, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


 * JohnManuel, I have absolutely nothing against the photo you posted, which I agree is an improvement. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 23:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


 * And as for all the rest, I have very little idea what you're talking about. But thanks for spending the time to share your views.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 23:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


 * No. # issue: Photo of Machado de Assis has been, gladly clarified and John Manuel-&quot;-Todos Llegan de Noche, todos se van de día&quot; 15:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Lets Move on: second issue
This is for jbmurray, but everybody is invited to discuss this issue.


 * Before, I make some editions or changes in this page, let talk about about the word Mulatto and its differences with Black, White and Afro-American or even American-Jewish or will be Jewish-American; what do you think? What was the race of Machado de Assis, was he black or Mulato or White, Hispanic Black, a Black Portuguese? -&quot;-Todos Llegan de Noche, todos se van de día&quot; 01:54, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * JohnManuel, I'm not entirely sure what this is all about, but if the question is whether or not Machado was a mulatto, I'm more than happy for that word to be employed. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 02:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * No 2. Issue: The proper usage of the word Mulatto to identify the racial background of Machado de Assis have been gladly clarified and Thanks for your cooperaion and participation, proceeding to its incorporation into the context, after a prudent amount the time has elapsed to confirm our consensus.  John Manuel-&quot;-Todos Llegan de Noche, todos se van de día&quot; 15:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Third Issue
At the first introductory paragraph the reader can read this:


 * "Harold Bloom and Woody Allen are some of his admirers; Bloom calls him the greatest black writer in the history of Western literature (one should note, however, that in Brazil Machado would hardly be called black: see discussion on race in Brazil)."

I propose to convert this long sentence into or to a something similar to the one below but different than the sentence above:


 * Harold Bloom and Woody Allen are some of the admirers of Machados de Assis work or writings."

Rationale:


 * That information does not pertain to the biography of this writer
 * It produces an unnecessary fatigue to the readers: Now they have to figure it out who Harold Bloom is and so forth.
 * Introduces a discussion of race, that if far fetch from the real topic, which is about the life and work of this writer.
 * It could propel racial sentiments or evenly offend some readers, from different backgrounds, it might lead to a controversy.
 * Finally, doesn't say any thing about Machado' contributions, even more it is diverting the attention to his race or cultural differences about racial denominations among different people, that is another issue altogether and is not the primary or secondary reason for him to be mentioned or write about in this encyclopedia, and in others as well, in effect his work and his life are and should remain to be  the topics.
 * It it seems too interesting they let us create a section for it that can be trivialities or something around that meaning.

Again, Lets change this sentences to something more pertaining to this writer.

John Manuel-&quot;-Todos Llegan de Noche, todos se van de día&quot; 16:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * All issues of this page have been rationally an gladly

Romantism or realism
In the box in the right is said that Machado is a romantic writer too.The works of Machado de Assis in the romantic age don't matter to brasilian's literature at all.His great contribution to literature was in realism ,his book "Memórias póstumas de Brás Cubas" is the introducer of realism in Brasil, so is a error report Machado as a romantic writer. And nobody knows Machado de Assis as Bruxo do Cosme Velho here in his country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.19.102.9 (talk) 20:45, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You're right! He was a realist according to several books on the subject. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 11:29, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

FA in pt
See: the article in portuguese. N and O  ta lk !|undefined   02:13, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Great, greatness, greatest?
Maybe some of these great words could be stated in a slightly more diplomatic manner? It is subjective after all...95.166.219.107 (talk) 15:28, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Several major errors in this document
Please check your facts again. This article is at serious odds with the Portuguese version, and several other literary sources about Machado de Assis.

Major error I noted right off the bat:

1. Machado de Assis was in favor of the Republic, NOT the monarchy: "Ele fundou em 1860 com seu cunhado Josefino Vieira o periódico O Jequitinhonha, por meio do qual teria difundido o ideal republicano."

[Original Source: Lopes JL. "A doença de Machado de Assis". In: A Psiquiatria de Machado de Assis. Ed. Agir, 2ª Edição. Rio de Janeiro RJ 1981. Can also be found in Portuguese version]

Translation: In 1860, he founded with his brother-in-law Josefino Vieira the newspaper O Jequitinhonha, whereby he would broadcast the idea of republicanism.

The Portuguese Wiki article then goes on to describe how he was critical of the new republic when it's main focus turned to capitalism:

'Sabe-se que Machado detestava o "vale-tudo do dinheiro pelo dinheiro"'

Translation: It is known that Machado detested the "exchange of money for money."

Hope that helps set things straight.

-MA Latin American Studies graduate student, University of Kansas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.129.240.43 (talk) 06:45, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 01 June 2014

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved. Been listed for over two weeks and there haven't actually been any opposes. Jenks24 (talk) 17:29, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Joaquim Maria Machado de Assis → Machado de Assis – WP:COMMONNAME – --Relisted. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:06, 9 June 2014 (UTC)  – Gabriel Yuji (talk) 19:52, 1 June 2014 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:28, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Joaquim Maria Machado de Assis → Machado de Assis  – WP:COMMONNAME – Gabriel Yuji (talk) 19:52, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * A WP:COMMONNAME determination essentially always needs to be determined via consensus. Contesting this solely on this rationale. Steel1943  (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * And in this case use of his maternal surname and paternal surname as a penname in title may not be what English sources do. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * And if moved, also 2 category moves :: Category:Joaquim Maria Machado de Assis → Category:Machado de Assis and Category:Novels by Joaquim Maria Machado de Assis → Category:Novels by Machado de Assis (asked as page moves by User:Vegaswikian at 20:24, 1 June 2014 (UTC)) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:31, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually I objected to the technical move since these belong at WP:CFD and not RM which is the wrong forum to discuss. The category discssions should be moved to WP:CFD. Vegaswikian (talk) 15:30, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I see. A (potentially) controversial request to move cats is rejected by Move with the error Template:Requested move is not for categories, see Categories for discussion
 * Maybe RMassist should be making the same edit check, and probably others as documented here.
 * But it would still be good to cross-link related article and category move discussions; perhaps the category moves should be contingent on consensus for the article move. Wbm1058 (talk) 12:09, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. →→→→→→→←←←←

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Machado de Assis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080625000000/http://www.plcs.umassd.edu/pdfs/plcs13_14_intro.pdf to http://www.plcs.umassd.edu/pdfs/plcs13_14_intro.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Machado de Assis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051029153456/http://www.bibvirt.futuro.usp.br/index.php to http://www.bibvirt.futuro.usp.br/index.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:00, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Recolorized picture
There has been a few removals of the recolorized picture recently, most recently by who raised original research concerns. I tried findingthe actual source of the image and found a New York Times article on the subject. The article reports that the image is from São Paulo's university Zumbi dos Palmares, which alliviates the original research concerns, but do raise concerns about it being improperly tagged on the commons. Currently it's tagged under own work, but since it wasn't originally published on the commons I believe this isn't an appropriate tag even if it's uploaded by the creator. The image is heavily implied to be free to use by the page Machado de Assis Real, but I could not find any information about the license. If anyone knows how to deal with this situation please do, but in the mean time I believe it would be appropriate to display the image in the article since the original research issues has been dealt with. Trialpears (talk) 08:07, 2 July 2019 (UTC)


 * , I asked in the Instagram page from the project for the image be released in the Wikimedia Commons (so, is their work). English page. Erick Soares3 (talk) 20:58, 5 November 2019 (UTC)