The main objective of the article is to
View from the Rio favelas: 'We're often scared to leave the house in case we're hit by a stray bullet'
A year has gone by since the Olympic Games. Only 147 of those 365 days ended without the residents of Complexo do Alemão
hearing gunshots. After the promises of hope and the Games’ legacy of peace, 218 days were accompanied by a soundtrack of
gunfire.
On 218 days we were afraid we wouldn’t make it home alive; we were scared to leave the house in case we were hit by a stray bullet;
on 218 days we were afraid that the walls of our homes might be hit. To pretend that we were not in a war zone, the military police
painted their armoured military tanks – popularly called caveirão, or “big skull” – white.
For a long time I’ve wondered about the reason for the conflict and danger in the favelas of Rio, the same places that hold so much
shared affection, culture, art and memory.
Since the Olympics, residents of the Complexo do Alemão have been afraid of organising a cultural event in the neighbourhood
square, or of people gathering outside because an intense shootout might happen without prior notice, with no chance to find
protection. It has been 218 days of fear.
All eyes – and investments – were turned to Brazil when it hosted, over 10 years, three mega sporting events. But the country has
failed to keep its promises of peace after the 2007 Pan-American Games, the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympic Games.
Before the Olympics, the state was completely absent in the favela. Back then we had no cable car – now we do, but it doesn’t work.
We did not have family clinics – now we do, but without medical care. There were no police – now there are, and we live with daily
shootings. What have the poorest received as a result of the Games? On television, I see only news of corruption.
Brazil is at war, some say. A war on the poor, justified by drugs. A war that justifies, for many (but not for me) the presence of the
Brazilian army in the streets of the city. The beauty of Rio’s natural landscapes contrasts with the conflict of our daily lives, militarised
by the government.
We need to talk about the relationship between violence and drugs. Young people from different favelas are now coming together to
think about strategies that we hope can feed into public policies on drugs in Brazil. The #Movimentos movement – which runs
discussions and seminars for young people – was created because it isn’t possible to deal with the drugs issue without the input of
those who live with the consequences of failed policies.
As other countries move towards resolving the issue in a serious way, investing in research and prevention mechanisms in public
health services, Brazil invests in more weapons and repression that result in an increase of death and incarceration – particularly
among people who are poor, black, young and living in favelas.
But despite all the fear, all the chaos, we continue to conquer the world, occupying the spaces that we have been historically denied.
The Coletivo Papo Reto (Straight Talk Collective) has created a calendar that celebrates the good news and achievements of the
people who live in Complexo do Alemão. Many people may not understand what it is that motivates us in the midst of this chaos and
fear. I don’t know either – but I feel that I must keep going.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/aug/19/rio-voices-view-from-the-favelas-olympics-they-promised-a-legacy-of-peace-but-brazil-is-now-at-war. Access on 22/8/2017)
Gabarito comentado
Alternativa correta: C
Tema central: identificar a ideia principal do texto — ou seja, o propósito comunicativo do autor. Aqui é essencial distinguir entre opinião, causa/efeito e foco do relato: o texto relata consequências sociais das Olimpíadas nas favelas e avalia se as promessas de desenvolvimento foram cumpridas.
Resumo teórico rápido: em interpretação de texto, para achar a ideia principal, procure: 1) passagens que se repetem (repetição de “218 dias”, “medo”, “promessas”); 2) conclusão do autor (parágrafos finais que sintetizam o juízo); 3) relação entre partes: fatos descritos + avaliação crítica = propósito. (Técnicas de leitura crítica baseadas em identificação de tópico e tese.)
Justificativa da alternativa C: o autor descreve mudanças ocorridas desde os eventos esportivos (cabine aérea que não funciona, clínicas sem atendimento, polícia presente mas com tiroteios) e contrapõe as promessas de paz ao resultado real. Logo, o objetivo principal é mostrar que as Olimpíadas não trouxeram o desenvolvimento esperado às favelas.
Análise das alternativas incorretas: A — “Mostrar que os Jogos foram um desastre”: exagera o foco. O texto não avalia todos os aspectos dos Jogos, foca especificamente nas consequências sociais nas favelas. B — “Reportar como a polícia age”: há menção à polícia, mas isso sustenta uma crítica maior; não é o foco exclusivo. D — “Provar que o Brasil está em guerra”: o autor usa a metáfora “Brasil is at war” e discute militarização, mas não busca provar literal guerra; é parte de uma crítica ao legado dos eventos. E — “Demonstrar que não há conexão entre violência e drogas”: o texto discute a relação e sugere que políticas falharam, não nega conexão; portanto alternativa contrária ao conteúdo.
Estratégias para provas: - Procure frases que expressem juízo do autor (palavras como “failed”, “we were afraid”, “what have the poorest received?”). - Distinga detalhe (polícia, clínicas, cable car) da tese geral (fracasso do legado). - Elimine alternativas que sejam verdadeiras isoladamente mas não sintetizem o propósito do texto.
(Fonte do texto adaptado: The Guardian, 2017)
Gostou do comentário? Deixe sua avaliação aqui embaixo!
