O livro é melhor que o filme? Literatura e cinema sob a ótica de estudantes do Ensino Fundamental II

Abstract

This research analyzes the practices and the knowledge of students in the 9th grade regarding literature and cinema – and their intersemiotic and hypertextual relations – in the context of the study of cinematographic adaptations. The theoretical background was constructed from an interdisciplinary perspective, considering the dialogue among studies of Education (COSSON, 2014; 2009; BELMIRO & MACIEL, 2014; BELMIRO, 2012; 2008; PINHEIRO, 2006; DIONÍSIO, 2000; and PAULINO, 2004), of Literature (GENETTE, 2010; CUNHA, 2009; LAJOLO, 1994; PROENÇA FILHO, 1995; and FISH, 1980), of Cinema (GUIMARÃES, 2015; JULLIER & MARIE, 2012; DUARTE, 2009; and MARTIN, 1990) and of Film Adaptation (HUTCHEON, 2013; ARRUDA, 2007; STAM, 2006; DINIZ, 2005; JOHNSON, 2003; and MCFARLANE, 1996). In the methodological delineation, we adopted a qualitative research approach and used different procedures and instruments to collect data: the application of closed questionnaires, analysis of school and official documents, semi-structured interviews in groups and interventions with the two surveyed groups. One of the fundamental procedures for the production of data was the configuration of the field research methodology, which proposed an inversion of presentation of works and languages – literature–cinema and cinema–literature – in order to better highlight the perspectives and practices of students with the cinematographic adaptations O menino no espelho and Meu pé de laranja lima and the homonymous literary works. The study evidenced that there are different types of adaptations and forms of establishment of intersemiotic, hypertextual, interdiscursive and intertextual relations. This indicates diverse creative and interpretative possibilities of the languages. Through the triangulation of socioeconomic data, closed questionnaires and interviews, students' cultural and scholastic practices are discussed in relation to literature, cinema and film adaptation. The students demonstrate various practices with the literature, necessitating the grouping of subjects into reader profiles; on the other hand, their practices with cinema and adaptation are very similar, both in cultural life and the school context. Although these readers belong to certain profiles, and distinctions are also found in each profile, there are common practices, knowledge and ways of dealing with knowledge and artistic productions that identify them as members of a given interpretive community (FISH, 1980). In this interpretive community of readers and movie watchers, literature predominates as an object of school study, on which different strategies of interpretation are offered, and cinema is approached as a complement in school activities. Consequently, the absence of explicit strategies for interpreting film discourse and the intersemiotic translation process interferes with students' understanding of film adaptation and of the different possible relations to be made through semiotic re-creation. The results of the research showed that the different meanings and practices of the students with the cinematographic adaptations and the literary works are related to the order of contact, the type of adaptation and the profile of the reader. This study considers the need to deepen the aesthetic training of students, so that they not only fully understand the different arts and their languages, but, above all, their interactions and different hybridizations.