Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.754442
Title: Violence and invisibility during Salazarism : the politics of visibility through the films '48' and 'O Alar Da Rede'
Author: Borges, Sofia Lopes
ISNI:       0000 0004 7427 4784
Awarding Body: Goldsmiths, University of London
Current Institution: Goldsmiths College (University of London)
Date of Award: 2018
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
This investigation analyses the relations uniting the long endurance of the Salazarist dictatorship in Portugal and the political processes of its cryptic violence. Departing from the differentiation between different types of violence, this thesis shows that structural violence was used intentionally by the regime within the limits of a spectrum of visibility, in an effort to create its own normalisation. This research examines the mechanism and manifestation of both direct and structural violence through a study of different filmic data. Film served as key propaganda medium for the regime, holding together the concealment of direct violence and generating structural violence. Undermining this authoritarian gesture, this enquiry further explores the device of visibility, intrinsic to filmic material, which challenges the Portuguese regime's politics of self-censorship. By articulating recent political theories and image philosophy with two films O Alar da Rede by Michel Giacometti, (1962) and 48 by Susana de Sousa Dias, (2012), this thesis reflects on the moment when a process of rendering visible exposes a form of resistance to violent hidden policies. With elaborated methods, both films manage to reinsert in the present, a violence from the past. The filmic paradigm described in this paper exposes original tools to fight a violence that was previously concealed within normative conundrums.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.754442  DOI:
Share: