Questões do ENEM: Linguagens

David Cooper dirige uma crítica à psiquiatria quando esta define saúde como ausência de doença e, desse modo, acaba por não definir adequadamente a própria doença mental.

Essa forma de definição incorre em um sofisma conhecido como:

Está 100% estabelecido que esses genes não têm nenhuma influência sobre qualquer traço comportamental ou intelectual. (ℓ. 37-38)

Para introduzir a frase acima, mantendo a coerência com a que a precede, pode ser utilizada a seguinte expressão:

Por exemplo, “A busca pela compreensão cósmica” é uma das aulas, na qual apresento a evolução dos modelos que temos do universo. (ℓ. 23-24)

No trecho, a forma verbal sublinhada expressa uma ação que se caracteriza como:

            Brazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives

      For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge

      “The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.

      For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]

      In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […] 

      Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.

      First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.

      Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.

      Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly. 

      With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?

      In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.

       Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.

      […]

      We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.” 

Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> . Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.

            Brazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives

      For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge

      “The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.

      For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]

      In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […] 

      Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.

      First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.

      Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.

      Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly. 

      With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?

      In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.

       Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.

      […]

      We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.” 

Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> . Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.

            Brazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives

      For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge

      “The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.

      For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]

      In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […] 

      Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.

      First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.

      Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.

      Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly. 

      With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?

      In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.

       Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.

      […]

      We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.” 

Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> . Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.

            Brazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives

      For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge

      “The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.

      For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]

      In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […] 

      Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.

      First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.

      Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.

      Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly. 

      With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?

      In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.

       Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.

      […]

      We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.” 

Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> . Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.

            Brazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives

      For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge

      “The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.

      For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]

      In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […] 

      Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.

      First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.

      Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.

      Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly. 

      With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?

      In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.

       Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.

      […]

      We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.” 

Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> . Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.

A questão é referente à obra A dança dos cabelos, de Carlos Herculano Lopes.

Leia o seguinte excerto:

       “Assentada neste banco onde a empregada me trouxe o jantar e após a sobremesa uma garrafa de café, estou com os olhos no azul da serra e no sol que nele se abriga, nessa estranha hora em que o silêncio é cortado apenas pelo berro de uma rês ou pelo cruzar de uma ave, e em que faço mais um cigarro, sem, no entanto, livrar-me dos latejos que em fincadas sucessivas voltam às minhas pernas e doem como as antigas lembranças de minha infância.”

LOPES, Carlos Herculano. A dança dos cabelos. Rio de Janeiro: Record, 2017.

Leia o seguinte excerto:

“Às vezes, estando ocupada na cozinha ou em outros afazeres, como remendar as calças que Antônio usava no campo, ou passando algum dos seus ternos para as reuniões políticas, ou da maçonaria, ou ainda respondendo às cartas que os empregados recebiam dos parentes em São Paulo, ou fazendo as quitandas que nunca faltaram aqui em casa, assim como o café com leite que ainda tomamos antes de deitar, ou seja lá o que for, que nem sempre eu percebia a ausência de minha filha.”

LOPES, Carlos Herculano. A dança dos cabelos. Rio de Janeiro: Record, 2017.

Considerando esse excerto da obra e o contexto de toda a narrativa, analise as assertivas e assinale a alternativa correta.

I. As personagens femininas possuem alto poder de reflexão, uma vez que levam uma vida tranquila, o que propicia a atividade reflexiva.

II. As mulheres da narrativa sofrem constantemente dos abusos de um contexto patriarcal, o que pode contribuir para a formação de comportamentos contrários à moral convencional.

III. Os homens da narrativa possuem práticas abusivas que levam à falta de atividade reflexiva por parte das mulheres, uma vez que estas são forçadas ao trabalho contínuo, vetando a possibilidade de um pensamento acerca do mundo que as circunda.

V. Há a preocupação de uma das personagens, de nome Isaura, em perder as terras que, segundo ela, foram conquistadas com o suor de seus familiares de gerações passadas.

V. O estupro é uma prática recorrente na narrativa.

A questão é referente à obra A dança dos cabelos, de Carlos Herculano Lopes.

Leia o seguinte excerto:

       “Assentada neste banco onde a empregada me trouxe o jantar e após a sobremesa uma garrafa de café, estou com os olhos no azul da serra e no sol que nele se abriga, nessa estranha hora em que o silêncio é cortado apenas pelo berro de uma rês ou pelo cruzar de uma ave, e em que faço mais um cigarro, sem, no entanto, livrar-me dos latejos que em fincadas sucessivas voltam às minhas pernas e doem como as antigas lembranças de minha infância.”

LOPES, Carlos Herculano. A dança dos cabelos. Rio de Janeiro: Record, 2017.

              A questão refere-se à obra As melhores histórias de Fernando Sabino.

                   O texto a seguir é um excerto da crônica O caso do charuto.

E o ascensorista inflexível. Que o homem guardasse o charuto no bolso, engolisse o charuto, fizesse o que melhor lhe parecesse. Sem o quê, ele não subiria. Distraído pelos próprios argumentos, o homem, em vez de se desfazer do charuto, tirou dele uma baforada. Foi o bastante para generalizar-se a confusão. A senhora do Bronx resolveu intervir, alegando raivosamente que ela não tinha nada com aquela história e queria subir. O panamenho, como se estivesse no mundo da lua, perguntava em vão e em mau inglês em que andar era o Consulado do Panamá. O gordinho gritava que aquilo era um desaforo etc. etc. E o elevador parado. O dono do charuto levou-o novamente à boca, para ter as mãos livres e poder se explicar, provocando indignação geral. Então o gordinho, fora de si, estendeu o braço para com uma tapa derrubar o charuto, resolvendo assim a questão. Acontece, porém, que seu gesto foi mal calculado e o que ele deu foi um bofetão na cara do homem. O charuto saltou no ar largando brasa para cima do panamenho, que até então não entendia coisa nenhuma.

SABINO, Fernando. As melhores histórias de Fernando Sabino. Rio de Janeiro: BestBolso, 2010. p. 61.  

Com base na leitura da obra As melhores histórias de Fernando Sabino, analise as assertivas e assinale a alternativa que aponta as corretas.

I. Algumas tramas se passam em Nova Iorque e há referências a espaços artísticos, bares, restaurantes e artistas que são famosos no contexto estadunidense.

II. Por vezes, tem-se nas narrativas uma perspectiva, da parte do narrador, perpassada pelo preconceito racial. Isso se faz notar de maneira explícita na crônica Albertine Disparue, por meio da caracterização da personagem Albertina, a qual é funcionária do narrador.

III. O recurso da ironia não é uma constância na obra.

IV. Por causa da linguagem leve, divertida e acessível presente nas crônicas, as reflexões profundas ficam em segundo plano. Tal característica é comum no gênero crônica.

V. Muitas das crônicas presentes na obra apresentam processos intertextuais, seja por meio da evocação direta e indireta de textos literários, seja por meio da alusão ou citação do nome de outros autores da literatura, dentre eles Marcel Proust.

              A questão refere-se à obra As melhores histórias de Fernando Sabino.

                   O texto a seguir é um excerto da crônica O caso do charuto.

E o ascensorista inflexível. Que o homem guardasse o charuto no bolso, engolisse o charuto, fizesse o que melhor lhe parecesse. Sem o quê, ele não subiria. Distraído pelos próprios argumentos, o homem, em vez de se desfazer do charuto, tirou dele uma baforada. Foi o bastante para generalizar-se a confusão. A senhora do Bronx resolveu intervir, alegando raivosamente que ela não tinha nada com aquela história e queria subir. O panamenho, como se estivesse no mundo da lua, perguntava em vão e em mau inglês em que andar era o Consulado do Panamá. O gordinho gritava que aquilo era um desaforo etc. etc. E o elevador parado. O dono do charuto levou-o novamente à boca, para ter as mãos livres e poder se explicar, provocando indignação geral. Então o gordinho, fora de si, estendeu o braço para com uma tapa derrubar o charuto, resolvendo assim a questão. Acontece, porém, que seu gesto foi mal calculado e o que ele deu foi um bofetão na cara do homem. O charuto saltou no ar largando brasa para cima do panamenho, que até então não entendia coisa nenhuma.

SABINO, Fernando. As melhores histórias de Fernando Sabino. Rio de Janeiro: BestBolso, 2010. p. 61.  

Texto 3

“ALIEN INTERVIEW” (Entrevista com um alienígena)

No momento em que o ser alienígena tinha sido devolvido à base eu já tinha passado várias horas com ela. Como já referi, o Sr. Cavitt me disse para ficar com a extraterrestre, já que eu era a única pessoa entre nós que poderia compreendê-la e manter comunicação telepaticamente. Eu não pude compreender e entender a minha capacidade de me “comunicar” telepaticamente com o ser extraterrestre. Eu nunca antes havia tido experiência com comunicação telepática com alguém.

A comunicação não-verbal que eu experimentei era como a compreensão que se tem quando uma criança ou um cão está tentando fazer você entender alguma coisa, mas muito, muito mais direta e poderosa! Mesmo que não houvesse falado “palavras”, ou comunicação através de sinais, a intenção dos pensamentos eram inconfundíveis para mim. Percebi mais tarde que, apesar de eu receber o pensamento, eu necessariamente não interpretava o seu significado exatamente.

[...]

Disponível em:<http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vida_alien/alieninterview/alieninterview.htm) >. Acesso em 10 nov.

Assinale a alternativa correta a respeito do Texto 3 e de seus elementos linguísticos.

                                             Texto 1

                O poeta contemporâneo ainda tem com o que se espantar?

                                                                                                 (Audrey de Mattos)

Falar da poesia contemporânea, esta que está aí, sendo produzida neste exato instante, é pensar nas mudanças que, de Aristóteles aos vanguardistas do século XX, transformaram a forma conhecida por poesia em território do heterogêneo: grotesco e sublime, temas elevados e temas cotidianos, linguagem polida e palavreado chulo, tudo convive na poesia contemporânea, nem de longe pacificamente, pois que o estranhamento e o (des)entendimento que assomam à alma de quem lê dão conta de que a atual poesia não veio para repousar (nem deixar repousar) em margens plácidas.

[...]

Trata-se então de ouvir o inaudível e ver o invisível, conforme a fórmula clássica baudelairiana. A linguagem poética, até então mero instrumento de reprodução da realidade, “reclamará uma maior autonomia em relação à normatividade do mundo, reivindicando assim algo que parecia impossível: a capacidade de transfigurar o real e integrar-se ao mundo como elemento constitutivo deste” (Tereza Cabañas, in “A poética da inversão”).

[...]

Do poema enterrado ao poema digital, a poesia incorporará tantas e tão variadas formas de expressão que levarão Antonio Cicero a afirmar, em fins da primeira década do século XXI: “Não há mais vanguarda”. “Qualquer fetichismo residual em relação a qualquer forma convencional da poesia” foi eliminado e “a consequente relativização de todas as formas tradicionais de poesia” afeta todos os poetas pós-vanguarda.

[...]

Adaptado de <http://lounge.obviousmag.org/conversa_de_botequim/2014/09/poesia-no-seculo-xxi-rumos.html#ixzz4ybiYJXfM. Acesso em: 10 nov. 2017.

CAPÍTULO CVI

... Ou, mais propriamente, capítulo em que o leitor, desorientado, não pode combinar as tristezas de Sofia com a anedota do cocheiro. E pergunta confuso: - Então a entrevista da Rua da Harmonia, Sofia, Carlos Maria, esse chocalho de rimas sonoras e delinquentes é tudo calúnia? Calúnia do leitor e do Rubião, não do pobre cocheiro que não proferiu nomes, não chegou sequer a contar uma anedota verdadeira. É o que terias visto, se lesses com pausa. Sim, desgraçado, adverte bem que era inverossímil que um homem, indo a uma aventura daquelas, fizesse parar o tílburi diante da casa pactuada. Seria pôr uma testemunha ao crime. Há entre o céu e a terra muitas mais ruas do que sonha a tua filosofia, – ruas transversais, onde o tílburi podia ficar esperando.

- Bem; PONTO E VÍRGULA? o cocheiro não soube compor. Mas que interesse tinha em inventar a anedota?

Conduzira Rubião a uma casa, onde o nosso amigo ficou quase duas horas, sem o despedir; viu-o sair, entrar no tílburi, descer logo e vir a pé, ordenando-lhe que o acompanhasse. Concluiu que era ótimo freguês; mas, ainda assim não se lembrou de inventar nada. Passou, porém, uma senhora com um menino, – a da Rua da Saúde – e Rubião quedou-se a olhar para ela com vistas de amor e melancolia. Aqui é que o cocheiro o teve por lascivo, além de pródigo, e encomendou-lhe as suas prendas. Se falou em Rua da Harmonia foi por sugestão do bairro donde vinham, e se disse que trouxera um moço da Rua dos Inválidos, é que naturalmente transportara de lá algum, na véspera, – talvez o próprio Carlos Maria, – ou porque lá morasse, ou porque lá tivesse a cocheira, – qualquer outra circunstância que lhe ajudou a invenção, como as reminiscências do dia servem de matéria aos sonhos da noite. Nem todos os cocheiros são imaginativos. Já é muito CONSERTAR? farrapos da realidade.

Resta só a coincidência de morar na Rua da Harmonia uma das costureiras do luto. Aqui, sim, parece um propósito do acaso. Mas a culpa é da costureira; não lhe faltaria casa mais para o centro da cidade, se quisesse deixar a agulha e o marido. Ao contrário disso, ama-os sobre todas as cousas deste mundo. Não era razão para que eu cortasse o episódio, ou interrompesse o livro.

ASSIS, Machado. Quincas Borba. São Paulo: Editora Globo, 1997. p. 142.

Levando-se em consideração a obra Quincas Borba e o fragmento acima, o narrador revela