Bem-morar em São Paulo, 1880-1910: Ramos de Azevedo e os modelos europeus

Domestic architecture achieves a great impulse in the second half of XIXth-century. From Europe to the whole world, models are conformed to the new social order and spread as industrialization takes command. Dwelling becomes the main concern among architects. New concepts are developed for the ideal house for 011 social strata: working class, middle-class, bourgeoisie. This essay traces the introduction in São Paulo of European formal patterns and principies Ihygiene, salubrity, comfort, social and domestic rites, social visibility) through the activity of F. P. Ramos de Azevedo! 1851-19281. The main projects he conceived for the local bourgeoisie are analysed.A arquitetura doméstica tem um grande impulso no século XIX. Da Europa são difundidos, para todo mundo, os modelos conformados à nova ordem social e à industrialização. A residência se transforma numa preocupação central dos arquitetos. Desenvolvem-se novos conceitos para casa ideal para todas as camadas sociais: operários, classe média, burguesia. Este artigo retrata, em São Paulo, a introdução de padrões formais e princípios (de higiene, salubridade, conforto, ritos sociais e domésticos, as aparências). a partir da atividade de F. P. Ramos de Azevedo (1851-19201. Analisam-se os principais projetos que ele desenvolveu para a burguesia local

“Wonderfully Cruel Proceedings”: The Murderous Case of James Yates

Copyright University of Toronto PressIn 1781, James Yates, a farmer in upstate New York, brutally murdered his family while suffering from a “religious delusion.” Fifteen years later, in 1796, The New York Weekly Magazine published an anonymously authored account of this episode, which in turn inspired Charles Brockden Brown’s novel Wieland. Previously unexamined newspaper reports of the original massacre uniformly link Yates’s violence to his religious identity as a Shaker. Shakerism’s emphasis on gender equality and rejection of patriarchal familial structures prefigured, in many ways, the republican ideological investment in women (particularly mothers) as repositories of virtue; thus, Yates’s crime can be understood as an early manifestation of a broader “crisis of masculinity” in the period. The 1796 account makes no mention of Yates’s Shakerism, but nevertheless participates in discourses of gender and nationhood; it memorializes the female victims, containing Yates’s “treasonous” violence against the family within an orderly narrative that privileges female heroism.Peer reviewe