Victoria Ocampo y el teatro: ¿un amor fugaz?

La gran escritora y personalidad cultural VictoriaOcampo (1890-1979) tuvo una vocación temprana de actriz deteatro. Con los años, su aporte al medio escénico argentino logróuna importante dimensión, hoy día casi ignorada. Fue directoradel Teatro Colón y hasta actuó en su escenario —como en eldel teatro Municipal de Río de Janeiro o el del Communale deFlorencia—. Facilitó el acceso de sus compatriotas al teatro devanguardia europeo (Osborne, Camus) a través de sus propiastraducciones, incluyó una columna de crítica teatral en su famosarevista Sur y hasta dio a conocer dos textos dramáticos propios.El presente estudio repasa estas facetas, y recupera y discute sudesempeño como actriz recitante y como dramaturg

Escritoras que reseñaron teatro en las páginas de Sur

As well as Alicia Jurado, four female writers published theater reviews in Sur magazine during the 50’s and 60’s: Vera Macarow, Graziella Peyrou, Fryda Schultz de Mantovani and María Luisa Bastos. Among them, Schultz de Mantonvani was the only one to ever produce drama-writing of her own. Their outlook on the texts they reviewed are of varied quality. In addition, they were not specialists on the matter.This article brings back long-forgotten reviews made by important collaborators. Their voices have been recklessly silenced due to editorial neglect. The research also evaluates their relevance in drama-reviewing.Además de Alicia Jurado, cuatro escritoras publicaron reseñas de textos teatrales en la revista Sur en las décadas de 1950 y 1960. Son Vera Macarow, Graziella Peyrou, Fryda Schultz de Mantovani y María Luisa Bastos. Entre ellas, solo Schultz de Mantovani produjo obra dramática propia. Sin ser especialistas en el género, dejaron reflexiones de distinto valor sobre los volúmenes que observaron.Este trabajo rescata publicaciones olvidadas de autoras que hicieron colaboraciones importantes en la revista, con voces hoy silenciadas por el tiempo y por desinterés editorial, a la vez que evalúa la competencia que tenían para la tarea encomendada

A randomized trial of planned cesarean or vaginal delivery for twin pregnancy

Background: Twin birth is associated with a higher risk of adverse perinatal outcomes than singleton birth. It is unclear whether planned cesarean section results in a lower risk of adverse outcomes than planned vaginal delivery in twin pregnancy.\ud \ud Methods: We randomly assigned women between 32 weeks 0 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation with twin pregnancy and with the first twin in the cephalic presentation to planned cesarean section or planned vaginal delivery with cesarean only if indicated. Elective delivery was planned between 37 weeks 5 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation. The primary outcome was a composite of fetal or neonatal death or serious neonatal morbidity, with the fetus or infant as the unit of analysis for the statistical comparison.\ud \ud Results: A total of 1398 women (2795 fetuses) were randomly assigned to planned cesarean delivery and 1406 women (2812 fetuses) to planned vaginal delivery. The rate of cesarean delivery was 90.7% in the planned-cesarean-delivery group and 43.8% in the planned-vaginal-delivery group. Women in the planned-cesarean-delivery group delivered earlier than did those in the planned-vaginal-delivery group (mean number of days from randomization to delivery, 12.4 vs. 13.3; P = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the composite primary outcome between the planned-cesarean-delivery group and the planned-vaginal-delivery group (2.2% and 1.9%, respectively; odds ratio with planned cesarean delivery, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.77 to 1.74; P = 0.49).\ud \ud Conclusion: In twin pregnancy between 32 weeks 0 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation, with the first twin in the cephalic presentation, planned cesarean delivery did not significantly decrease or increase the risk of fetal or neonatal death or serious neonatal morbidity, as compared with planned vaginal delivery