Leticia de Luna FreireEsta dissertacao trata da intervencao do Programa Favela-Bairro (desenvolvido ha dez anos pela prefeitura do Rio de Janeiro) na localidade de Acari em 2003 e 2004, analisada a luz da Teoria Ator-Rede. Pensado a partir das contribuicoes do antropologo das ciencias Bruno Latour, este operador teorico-metodologico e concebido como uma forma de abordar a fabricacao dos fatos, tomando simetricamente natureza e sociedade, humano e nao-humano. A pesquisa tem como objetivo acompanhar o processo desta intervencao urbana em Acari, descrevendo os atores (humanos e nao-humanos) envolvidos e analisando os efeitos de suas acoes na rede de implantacao do Programa Favela-Bairro na localidade. Ao destacar a construcao da pratica interventora, busca-se uma abordagem simetrica em Psicologia Social, na qual nem o polo individuo nem o polo sociedade seja a priori privilegiado.(*) Resumo da dissertacao da autora, defendida no Programa de Pos-Graduacao em Psicologia Social (PPGPS), da Universidade do Estados do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), orientador: Ronald Joao Jacques Arendt; co-orientadora: Teresa Cristina Carreteiro Pessoal, abaixo a resenha, mencionada pelo prof. Mello, em que Clifford Geertz faz uma analise sobre trabalho de campo a partir dos livros "Diario num sentido estrito do termo" e "Coral Gardens", ambos de Malinowski. Intitulada Under the mosquito net, a resenha foi publicada em 1967, no The New York Review of Books. Na edicao seguinte, a revista publicou duas cartas comentando a resenha, ambas tambem estao disponiveis.The New York Review of BooksVolume 9, Number 4, September 14, 1967Under the Mosquito NetBy Clifford GeertzA Diary in the Strict Sense of the Termby Bronislaw MalinowskiHarcourt, Brace & World, 315 pp., $6.95Coral Gardens and their Magic: I: Soil Tilling and Agricultural Rites in the Trobriand Islands II: The Language of Magic and Gardeningby Bronislaw MalinowskiIndiana University, Vol. 2, 350 pp., $7.50Ten years ago several eminent anthropologists, linguists, and sociologists who had, in one way or another, been students of Malinowski decided that he had been unjustly neglected since his death in 1942 and put together a collection of essays, each of which was devoted to a particular aspect of his work.[*] But, as the writers were frank and competent, the result did rather more to justify the neglect than to end it. Meyer Fortes of Cambridge decided that although Malinowski wrote about Kinship incessantly, he really didn't understand it. S. F. Nadel indicted his religious studies as a simplistic "theology of optimism." J. R. Firth, though sympathetic to his aims, regarded his technical linguistic contribution as consisting of "sporadic comments immersed and perhaps lost in what is properly called his ethnographic analysis." Edmund Leach thought his theoretical writings "not merely dated [but] dead"; Talcott Parsons that he misinterpreted both Durkheim and Freud and had hardly heard of anyone else; Raymond Firth that he failed to grasp economic reasoning; Isaac Schapera that he was unwilling or unable to distinguish law from custom. Only on one point was there unanimous and quite unqualified praise: Malinowski was an incomparable fieldworker. Possessed, in Audrey Richard's words, of "unusual linguistic gifts, lively powers of personal contact and terrific energy," he "achieved a great measure of