Visual poetics in LIBRAS and linguistic rights: a cartography of artistic-cultural practices with deaf youth

Abstract

This article presents a cartographic analysis of an artistic-cultural intervention with deaf youth at the São Carlos Deaf Association. Grounded in Deaf Studies and Philosophies of Difference, it investigates how aesthetic-poetic practices in Brazilian Sign Language (LIBRAS) intersect with linguistic and cultural rights. The workshops involved image reading, experimentation, and visual creation, inspired by Van Gogh’s Sunflower Field and the signed poetry of Cláudio Mourão, as developed in the #CasaLibras project. Data collection included video recordings, field notes, and artworks. The analysis highlights the marginalization of deaf art, deferred textuality as an authorial practice, and art in LIBRAS as an assertion of political and identity-based claims, advocating for beyond-accessibility as an ethical-political horizon.

Keywords
deafness; linguistic rights; art in LIBRAS; deferred textuality; cultural intervention

Resumo

O artigo apresenta uma análise cartográfica de uma intervenção artístico-cultural com jovens surdos na Associação dos Surdos de São Carlos. Fundamentado nos Estudos Surdos e nas Filosofias da Diferença, investiga como práticas estético-poéticas na Língua Brasileira de Sinais (Libras) se articulam aos direitos linguísticos e culturais. As oficinas envolveram leitura de imagens, experimentação e criação visual, inspiradas em Campo de Girassóis, de Van Gogh, e na poesia sinalizada de Cláudio Mourão, desenvolvida no projeto #CasaLibras. A produção de dados incluiu videogravações, diário de campo e obras artísticas. A análise evidenciou a invisibilização da arte surda, a textualidade diferida como prática autoral e a arte em Libras como reivindicação político-identitária, defendendo a além-acessibilidade como horizonte ético-político.

Palavras-chave
surdez; direitos linguísticos; arte em libras; textualidade diferida; intervenção cultural

Resumen

El artículo presenta un análisis cartográfico de una intervención artístico-cultural con jóvenes sordos en la Asociación de Sordos de São Carlos. Fundamentado en los Estudios Sordos y en las Filosofías de la Diferencia, investiga cómo las prácticas estético-poéticas en lengua de señas brasileña (Libras) se articulan con los derechos lingüísticos y culturales. Los talleres incluyeron la lectura de imágenes, la experimentación y la creación visual, inspiradas en Campo de girasoles, de Van Gogh, y en la poesía signada de Cláudio Mourão, en el marco del proyecto #CasaLibras. La producción de datos incluyó videograbaciones, un diario de campo y obras artísticas. El análisis puso de manifiesto la invisibilización del arte sordo, la textualidad diferida como práctica autoral y el arte en Libras como reivindicación político-identitaria, y propone la más-allá-de-la-accesibilidad como horizonte ético-político.

Palabras clave
sordera; derechos lingüísticos; arte en Libras; textualidad diferida; intervención cultural

Introduction

Promoting equitable education for deaf people in Brazil faces persistent challenges, particularly in implementing Brazilian Sign Language (LIBRAS)¹ as a language of instruction and cultural mediation. Despite the legal recognition of LIBRAS since 2002, established by Law No. 10.436 and regulated by Decree No. 5.626/2005, the consolidation of language policies ensuring its full presence in educational, cultural, and social spaces remains a work in progress (Decreto nº 5.626, 2005; Lei nº 10.436, 2002; Lodi, 2013; Machado et al., 2017).

Various legal instruments recognize LIBRAS as the language of Brazilian deaf communities, guarantee linguistic rights, and mandate its presence in educational, cultural, and media contexts. However, a significant gap remains between the guarantees provided by law and the reality deaf people experience. A lack of public awareness regarding these rights exposes this population to situations of social and linguistic vulnerability, exacerbated by the absence of consistent public policies that promote access to information in LIBRAS and invest in continuing education processes specifically aimed at deaf communities (Lodi, 2013; Lopes, 2007; Martins, 2020; Martins & Lopes, 2024).

This gap is particularly evident in the artistic and cultural sphere. There is a scarcity of social productions that ensure deaf people’s right of access to cultural and entertainment content, in LIBRAS, of broad social circulation. This absence limits deaf people’s participation in activities that are essential to the construction of identity, a sense of belonging, and citizenship. The lack of theatrical performances, exhibitions, films, and other cultural productions conceived in or translated into LIBRAS compromises the full exercise of this population’s cultural rights (Albres, 2020; Martins, 2023).

This issue is linked to a broader tension within the field of deaf education: the prevalence of accessibility policies rooted in perspectives that prioritize practices based on normative models designed for hearing people. In her postdoctoral research, Martins (2024) highlights the absence of language policies that recognize the deaf community’s linguistic difference as an ontological right, rather than merely a technical accessibility requirement. Policies that limit themselves to minimal structural adjustments in educational and social environments predominate, failing to consider the linguistic, cultural, and identity-related specificities of deaf people, in contrast to policies aimed at Indigenous communities, immigrant groups, and other linguistic minorities, such as those found in border regions.

In this sense, Martins and Lopes (2024) argue for the urgency of moving beyond the conventional notion of accessibility, proposing a beyond-accessibility² approach, as the authors call it, which ensures the right to exist in difference. While they share struggles with other linguistic minorities, deaf people face specific challenges arising from their geographical dispersion and their recurrent association with the field of special education. This association contributes to reducing LIBRAS to a mere communicative resource, disregarding its status as a full language and as a producer of culture and thought.

This introductory reflection highlights tensions and challenges experienced by the deaf community: absence of linguistic policies that promote spaces for the acquisition of LIBRAS; lack of knowledge of sign language on the part of families of deaf children; delays in language acquisition; fragility of educational policies aimed at teaching in LIBRAS; scarcity of cultural spaces that promote productions mediated by LIBRAS; and the consequent low supply of entertainment products in sign language (Martins, 2023, 2024). In light of this scenario, an artistic-cultural intervention was developed that sought to contribute to the consolidation of human rights policies for deaf people, articulating education, culture, and art in LIBRAS within the context of non-formal education.

This study is situated within this problematic context, investigating how artistic-cultural practices in LIBRAS can constitute spaces for identity affirmation and the claiming of linguistic rights, understood here as the right to exercise another ontological form, which affirms life in difference. The guiding question that orients the investigation is: how are linguistic rights and the recognition of deaf cultural practices articulated in artistic-literary experiences developed in LIBRAS with deaf people?

The general objective is to analyze the processes of subjectivation and the forms of identity expression that emerge from a didactic-artistic-cultural intervention centered on valuing LIBRAS as a primary language for aesthetic and political creation (Soler & Martins, 2022). The specific objectives unfold along three axes:

1. understanding the relationships between artistic-cultural literacy and the linguistic rights of deaf people;

2. analyzing the processes of appropriating deferred textuality as a practice of deaf authorship;

3. identifying how art operates as an intermediary in processes of subjectivation and political advocacy.

The study’s relevance manifests across multiple dimensions. Socially, it contributes to the visibility of deaf cultural practices and to guaranteeing the right to art in LIBRAS, areas historically neglected by public policies. Academically, it integrates insights from Deaf Studies and Philosophies of Difference to explore the relationships between art, language, and human rights within the context of deafness. Politically, taking place within the São Carlos Deaf Association strengthens that space as a hub for cultural education, identity-based resistance, and community organizing.

The article is structured into four main sections. The first presents the theoretical framework, connecting Deaf Studies, Philosophies of Difference, linguistic rights, and deferred textuality. The second describes the cartographic methodology employed, detailing the context, participants, and procedures for data production and analysis. The third section organizes and discusses the data according to three analytical axes that emerged as zones of intensity during the research process. Finally, the concluding remarks summarize the study’s main contributions, implications, limitations, and possibilities for future research.

Deaf difference, cultural markers, and visual ontology

The theoretical perspective adopted in this study is grounded in Deaf Studies, an established field of inquiry that views deafness not as a deficit or pathology, but as a cultural and linguistic difference (Lopes, 2007; Skliar, 1998). Within this approach, deaf individuals are defined by cultural markers that allow for mutual recognition, forging shared values and meaningful commonalities that coalesce identities and foster connections.

Lopes (2007) identifies these markers as cultural countersigns: sign language, narrative practices, visual artifacts, community rituals, collective memories, and spaces of visual sociability. Such markers function as mechanisms of belonging that render the deaf experience intelligible, acting simultaneously as elements of differentiation and as strategies of resistance against hearing hegemony, thereby re-establishing deafness as a productive difference within the social fabric.

Building on this perspective, Pagni and Martins (2019) propose an ontological-philosophical understanding of deaf difference, arguing that physical deafness serves as a starting point for encountering the visual world, generating new sensory regimes. Linguistic experience remains central but does not encompass the full vitality of this difference; deaf expressiveness also erupts through gestures, bodily rhythms, poetic traits, and artistic creations that detach cultural production from the hegemonic benchmarks of the hearing norm.

According to Pagni and Martins (2019, pp. 15-16, our translation), this ethical and expressive perspective is characterized by the “ontological radicality of its difference, grounded in a constitutive visual relationship that is highly specific and extends beyond the mere use of a gestural-modality language.” It involves understanding the visual ethos as a constitutive dimension of deaf subjectivity, an effect of the event of deafness that brings the deaf being into existence in the space between the lack of hearing and the potentiality of vision, articulated through a comprehensive linguistic framework.

In this ontological expansion, cultural markers cease to be mere indicators of belonging and become ontogenetic forces that engender new ways of existing, narrating, and imagining the world. From the intertwining of body, language, and aesthetic creation emerges a unique cultural potency, a dimension that the interactive practices analyzed here aim to value and expand.

Linguistic rights, recognition, and the logic of accessibility

The discussion regarding the linguistic rights of deaf people requires an essential conceptual distinction between access and right. While Law No. 10,436/2002 and Decree No. 5,626/2005 recognize LIBRAS as a legal means of communication and expression, Martins and Lopes (2024) argue that the conflation of these terms has limited progress in guaranteeing an education that effectively takes place in LIBRAS. This tension is not new. Lodi (2013) previously highlighted how the education of deaf people was marked by conflicts between the legal framework recognizing LIBRAS and the guidelines of the national inclusive policy, noting that mere “access” to the language, without full recognition of its status as a right, perpetuates practices that keep sign language in a subordinate position.

Decree No. 5.626/2005 establishes that training for bilingual educators for deaf people must take place within Pedagogy or higher-level teacher-training programs, ensuring that both LIBRAS and written Portuguese serve as languages of instruction. Even though the decree reaffirms Portuguese as a language of instruction, revealing a historical limitation, the progress represented by the valorization of LIBRAS as a language of school instruction is undeniable.

However, it is worth highlighting the hypothesis that the guiding thread of the inclusive policy is solidified in educational access as the foundational mechanism of the inclusion gradient (Veiga-Neto & Lopes, 2011). This approach precludes the recognition of linguistic difference and other dimensions of learning as a constitutive right of the deaf identity. At a superficial level, the introduction of LIBRAS through educational interpreting and the translation of materials into the language might seem to promote recognition of the uniqueness of the deaf experience. Upon deeper analysis, however, this is understood to be a form of affirmative pseudo-recognition.

In her theory of social justice, Fraser (2022) provides a crucial analytical framework for understanding this issue. The author examines minority movements, specifically feminist movements, within the post-socialist condition, linking the concepts of cultural recognition (via affirmative action policies) and economic redistribution. Fraser argues that social movements require new theories to help view sociocultural and political phenomena in an integrated way: avoiding both the stance that problems can be solved solely through the lens of identity recognition and, at the other extreme, the view that solutions lie exclusively in the redistribution of wealth.

Applying this analysis to the context of the deaf minority, Martins and Lopes (2024, p. 8, our translation) propose a paraphrase: “subverting the educational divide between deaf and hearing people, thereby diminishing the significance of the imperialism of hearing life as a structural principle.” This entails understanding the deaf person not as the “other” in relation to the hearing person, but as an embodiment of difference in their own right.

The failure to effectively recognize the educational distinctions associated with deaf people, stemming from the expressiveness inherent in the visual ethos, results in a lack of cultural recognition and economic redistribution for this signing population. Consequently, this population is excluded from teaching and learning processes due to a lack of depth and interactional quality in LIBRAS, as instruction in the language fails to materialize within a visual framework. This exclusionary dynamic is reflected in their non-inclusion in higher education, the labor market, and more complex professional activities.

The concept of beyond-accessibility, proposed by Martins and Lopes (2024) in dialogue with Lodi (2013), advances the argument that recognizing the linguistic rights of deaf people requires more than merely providing access. It entails ensuring educational, cultural, and social conditions that address the linguistic, cultural, and identity-related specificities of the deaf community. Such recognition implies the consolidation of practices effectively conducted in LIBRAS, such as the creation of materials originally conceived in the language, the presence of LIBRAS-fluent professionals across institutional settings, and the establishment of environments where deaf individuals can interact, fostering the circulation of the language, culture, and knowledge-production methods unique to this community.

From this perspective, linguistic rights are intertwined with cultural rights, based on the understanding that access to education, art, aesthetic production, and cultural expressions in LIBRAS constitutes a fundamental dimension of deaf people’s social participation. Thus, guaranteeing the right to the language also encompasses the right to create, share, and experience educational, artistic, and cultural practices that emerge from deaf visuality and the community’s distinctive forms of expression.

Deferred textuality, multimodal literacy, and deaf cultural productions

The concept of deferred textuality, developed by Peluso (2007, 2019, 2020, 2022), constitutes a fundamental theoretical contribution to understanding deaf cultural productions. deaf cultural practices have frequently been recorded and disseminated via video recordings in LIBRAS; this reinforces a distinct form of textuality, understood as the capacity for discursive planning that separates the utterance from the moment of its production, whether in written or recorded form.

According to Peluso (2020, 2022), video-recorded production, when created with the intent of reaching a potential interlocutor who will access the material at a time distinct from the original act of utterance, creates a separation between the author and the text. This separation enables the circulation and recording of the utterance in a manner analogous to that of writing technology. Consequently, there are two types of records: the graphic representation of verbal production and the recorded record of the utterances themselves.

In the context of LIBRAS, given its visual-gestural modality, video-recorded textuality emerges as a fundamental medium for recording the utterances of signing individuals. The adoption of this concept by schools is essential, as it allows the utterance to be effectively deferred, enabling its circulation, dissemination, recording, and subsequent revisiting. This perspective contributes to valuing a form of textual materiality, widely used by deaf communities, that is not subordinate to alphabetic writing (Martins & Peluso, 2025; Soler & Martins, 2022).

Adopting the concept of deferred textuality in LIBRAS requires descriptive and analytical expansion, calling for studies that characterize the systematizing elements distinguishing the various genres produced via video recording. Santaella (2012, p. 13, our translation) states that “visual literacy means learning to read images, developing an observation of their constituent aspects and traits, and detecting what is produced within the image itself.” In other words, it means acquiring the relevant knowledge and developing the necessary sensitivity to understand how images present themselves, how they convey meaning, what their context of reference is, and how they signify.

While the term visual literacy is widely used in deaf education, the concept of multimodal literacy proves more appropriate. As Olson (1991) points out, writing entails a transition from the ear to the eye, making the term “visual literacy” redundant. The term “multimodal literacy,” drawing on the concept of multimodal discourse in Canale (2023), encompasses the process by which students acquire the ability to comprehend and produce content across various media in which text or discourse may appear, or to decode the multiple semiotic components that constitute textuality or discourse.

Thus, operant multimodal literacy (Martins & Peluso, 2025) is defined as an individual’s capacity to interpret and create meaning from LIBRAS videos circulating in society. This skill enables the individual to emerge, integrate, and participate in collectively constructed contexts of meaning-making. Such literacy is fundamental to the development of competent authors and creators of asynchronous texts in LIBRAS.

Soler and Martins (2022, 2024) expand this discussion by distinguishing between a matrix language and an additional language. LIBRAS, as a matrix language, is understood as the language that structures the process of subjectivation, offering a sense of identity-based comfort and being recognized as the “language of the heart” (Soler, 2022, p. 62). Portuguese language, viewed as a political language, is the medium through which everyday and mass information is disseminated socially (Soler, 2022). As the majority language, Portuguese is functionally necessary for deaf people in Brazil, especially in its written form, due to the lack of effective political recognition of LIBRAS.

Art as an intercessor: the creation of sensations and political resistance

The perspective of the Philosophies of Difference, drawing especially on the contributions of Deleuze and Guattari (1992), guides the understanding of art as a field for the creation of sensations. For these authors, art does not represent the world but creates it by producing percepts and affects, which are autonomous forms of existence. In this perspective, affect³ does not correspond to affection as a personal feeling or psychological emotion; rather, it is an intensive, impersonal force capable of instigating becomings and producing differences. Thus, percepts and affects constitute a force of life and creation.

Deleuze and Guattari (1992, p. 213, our translation) state that:

percepts are no longer perceptions; they are independent of the state of those who experience them; affects are no longer feelings or affections; they transcend the strength of those traversed by them. Sensations, percepts, and affects are entities that stand on their own and exceed any lived experience.

Thus, the work of art is understood as a being of sensation, composed of blocks of percepts and affects that subsist beyond the subject. It does not communicate inner states but creates possible worlds, establishing new forms of sensibility and existence.

This understanding of art as a field that produces affects and percepts allows us to conceive of deaf artistic-cultural practices not merely as expressions of identity, but also as spaces for the production of subjectivities and alternative modes of relating to the world. By proposing the collective exercise of visualizing and aesthetically experiencing the signed poetry mobilized here, the aim is to activate this sensible field of creation as a space for accessing, producing, and sharing experiences. It is not simply a matter of understanding the work’s content, but of feeling with it, allowing oneself to be affected by the intensities that run through its composition.

From a Deleuze-Guattarian perspective, art functions as an intercessor, engendering assemblages that catalyze new flows of sensibility. By creating sensations through a unique aesthetic visuality, it produces equally unique experimentations. It acts as an intercessor by intercepting the body, shifting perceptions, and establishing new ways of feeling and inhabiting the world.

Methodological research procedures

This study is grounded in the principles of Deleuze and Guattari’s cartography(1997), understanding knowledge production as a dynamic, situated, and ethical-aesthetic process. Cartography does not seek to represent fixed territories but rather to trace processes of subjectivation traversed by multiple forces: those stemming from normative assemblages and mechanisms of social control, and those emerging as lines of flight, desiring and uniquely creative.

As a method, cartography constitutes an art of encounters, where “everything in it is connection, mixture, composition, bricolage, intersection, combination,” requiring the researcher’s “inhabitation of different territories, from the perspective of transforming oneself to understand” (Silva & Paraíso, 2023, p. 2, our translation). Cartography means to trace the lines that traverse and constitute knowledge, to pay attention to becomings, and to adopt a stance of openness and experimentation so as not to lose sight of encounters and what they produce.

It is amidst the lines of territory that events, small acts of resistance, molecular inventions, deviations from the path, demolitions and deaths, becomings, and lines of flight take place. Through cartography, “we move among things, in the middle, stripping away the foundation, nullifying the beginning and the end. The middle is the place of encounters, improbable connections, assemblages that enable and affirm difference” (Silva & Paraíso, 2023, p. 2, our translation).

Drawing on the notion of cartography, understood not as a fixed representation of subjective territories. However, as a methodological procedure for tracking processes of subjectivation, the aim was to map the formative, expressive, and affective trajectories that emerged during the workshops and through interactions among the participants.

Context, participants, and group organization

The intervention took place at the Jurandyra Fehr São Carlos Deaf Association (ASSCJF), located in the interior of São Paulo state and recognized as a key community and cultural space for the local deaf population. The activities were held between April and June 2025. A total of 30 people participated, comprising deaf individuals and their hearing family members, who were organized into small groups of up to 5 members. However, for this article, the analysis focuses exclusively on the participation of deaf youths and adults, aged 17 to 45.

Two main reasons justify this specific focus. First, unlike most children, who are still undergoing late LIBRAS acquisition and are in the early stages of linguistic development, the participating youths and adults possessed sufficient command of the language to articulate critical perspectives on art, culture, and identity. Secondly, this is a generation shaped by a unique moment in the history of deaf education in Brazil: although they experienced the implementation of Law No. 10,436/2002 and Decree No. 5,626/2005 (legal milestones recognizing LIBRAS as a language of instruction), many of these individuals were schooled in contexts characterized by normative practices rooted in oralism, a lack of interpreters, and linguistic deprivation.

Listening to these adult narratives provided insight into experiences that highlight the tension between linguistic rights and lived reality. These accounts emerge with greater depth in adulthood, when the individual, having already been shaped by exclusionary educational policies, seeks forms of ontological recognition through art, culture, and sign language. During the workshops, all deaf participants used LIBRAS as their language for expression, creation, and sharing, thereby affirming its centrality as an aesthetic, communicative, and identity-forming foundation.

The groups were accompanied by four study support staff members: two research collaborators and two interns from the Bachelor’s program in LIBRAS and Portuguese Language Translation and Interpretation (TILSP) at the Federal University of São Carlos (UFSCar). These interns served as pedagogical mediators and were responsible for systematically recording activities and ensuring ethical and methodological oversight of the practices. This organizational structure fostered horizontal interactions, respecting the creative pacing, modes of participation, and unique expressive qualities of each group.

The choice of ASSCJF as the research setting is grounded in its significance as a community space for linguistic and cultural resistance. Like bilingual schools, associations for the deaf play a pivotal role in shaping deaf subjectivity by promoting socialization in LIBRAS, strengthening identity, and welcoming families who have historically been excluded from discussions regarding their children’s linguistic rights.

Data collection procedures

Data generation involved multiple, coordinated instruments and procedures, adhering to ethical principles for research⁴ involving human subjects and ensuring the active role of the deaf community:

1. Video recording of meetings: all workshop sessions were video-recorded to capture communication in LIBRAS and group interactions, thereby preserving the visual-gestural nature of the language. These recordings were essential for subsequent analysis, particularly regarding expressive language, collective creative processes, and mediation practices.

2. Field journal entries: the lead researcher made systematic notes after each workshop, compiling a reflective field journal that articulates observations, impressions, and analytical-interpretive notes regarding the process experienced. Collaborators also produced entries in complementary journals, enabling the triangulation of perceptions and perspectives.

3. Artistic and poetic productions: all works created by participants were documented: visual reinterpretations inspired by Van Gogh’s work, video-recorded poetic creations in LIBRAS, and posters featuring statements on the linguistic and cultural rights of deaf people.

4. Conversation circles: circle-shaped collective sessions involving all participants were held at the end of each stage, aiming to share productions, reflect on the processes experienced, and construct collective meanings from these experiences. These circles were also recorded for analysis purposes.

The activities proposed throughout the meetings included: (i) art and visual expression workshops—practices based on a signed reinterpretation of the work “O Campo de Girassóis de Van Gogh em poesia: releitura sinalizada” (Van Gogh’s Sunflower Field in Poetry: A Signed Reinterpretation), produced by Cláudio Mourão, a deaf artist, within the scope of the #CasaLibras project⁵; (ii) analysis of LIBRAS videos—activities involving the reading and analysis of poetic videos in LIBRAS, focusing on bodily expressiveness, the language’s visual grammar, and the meanings constructed by participants; (iii) collective production of visual reinterpretations—creation of bilingual visual panels based on human rights themes; (iv) formative and participatory evaluation at the end of the workshops, featuring an evaluation circle with the participants themselves, conducted in LIBRAS.

Analytical procedures and methodological rigor

Data analysis followed cartography principles, seeking not to fix meanings but to trace the subjects’ becoming, their creative gestures, and the modes of existence that emerge in the folds between art, language, and difference. This methodology does not seek to fix meanings but rather to trace processes, movements, and shifts.

The video material, field journal entries, and artistic productions were analyzed through systematic reading and by identifying events that served as analytical triggers. The selection of analytical axes was based not on criteria of frequency or recurrence, but on the intensity of lived experiences and the potency of the affects that emerged from the workshops. This analytical approach is guided by a cartographic perspective that seeks to trace processes, movements, and shifts rather than to establish predetermined results or conclusions.

Instead of organizing the analysis chronologically by meeting, the study was structured around three thematic axes that emerged as zones of intensity: (i) artistic-cultural literacy and non-recognition; (ii) deferred textuality as the production of authorship; and (iii) art as an intercessor and a political right. This analytical choice is justified by the cartographic orientation of prioritizing intensities and movements over linear sequences. Each axis constitutes an analytical trigger event, reflecting zones of contact and exchange among bodies, languages, and experiences, in which shared meanings and new modes of collective existence were produced. The central selection criterion was the capacity of these events to reveal the study’s cartographic fabric, i.e., points of intensification that trace lines of force and lines of flight, unveiling practices, forms of knowledge, and sensibilities inherent to the poetic experience of deaf subjects in LIBRAS.

It is important to highlight that, within the cartographic perspective adopted in this study, the events analyzed were neither predefined nor selected based on criteria of frequency, thematic saturation, or statistical representativeness. Selection took place during immersion in the materials produced (video recordings, field journals, discussion circles, and artistic works), aiming to identify situations that generated discursive, affective, aesthetic, or relational shifts among the participants. Analytic events were defined as moments when tensions regarding linguistic and cultural rights emerged, alongside processes of authorship in LIBRAS, expressions of belonging to the deaf community, shifts in identity, or experiences of collective creation that could generate new ways of assigning meaning to art, language, and the deaf condition itself. These records were interpreted through successive readings and a relational analysis of the various materials produced, with the aim of tracing the lines of force, affects, forms of resistance, and transformative movements that shaped the experience. Thus, the analytical focus was not on verifying pre-existing categories, but on tracking the processes of subjectivation that became visible through the encounters, narratives, creative gestures, and artistic-cultural productions developed throughout the intervention.

Results and discussion

Axis 1: Artistic-cultural literacy and historical non-recognition

The first analytical axis emerges from the initial experiences of the intervention, revealing a field of forces marked by the exclusion of deaf subjects from the historical recognition of art and literature. This absence stems not from an individual deficit but from systematic cultural neglect, characterized by a lack of educational practices in LIBRAS that promote access to aesthetic repertoires and artistic training as a human right. Within the cartography of affects (Deleuze & Guattari, 1992), grounded in Fraser’s perspective (2022), this exclusion manifests not merely as invisibility but as a historical impossibility of symbolic belonging and as limitations on the ethical-aesthetic affective potential that art enables.

The intervention began with an invitation video in LIBRAS, ensuring deaf agency from the very outset and establishing the research’s ethical-political framework. During the first meeting, the group was prompted with the question: “What do Human Rights have to do with deaf art and literature?” One participant, a deaf man over the age of 30, replied that human rights “are for looking after Black people,” revealing a limited yet critical understanding of inequality processes. Following this, the question was posed: “And why do these people need to be part of Human Rights?” This shift allowed for a move from common sense to an understanding of human rights as struggles for recognition and dignity (Comparato, 2023), thereby challenging the historical exclusion of deaf people.

This movement initiated a collective reflection on the very notion of belonging to rights-based agendas. One participant asked: “Is having an interpreter a human right, too?” However, the assertion of this linguistic right was followed by a pointed statement: “Then why does nothing change for us?” At this point, the realization emerged that, despite legal provisions, there is a disconnect between legal and cultural recognition—a dimension in which deaf people remain unrepresented.

It was against this backdrop that the discussion shifted to art. Projections of world-renowned painters and paintings revealed that none of the deaf participants recognized the artists or their works. When asked about their school experiences with art or literature, many stated that they did not remember or even understand the classes, highlighting an aesthetic exclusion that goes beyond the language barrier: deaf people have been cut off from cultural literacy and deprived of experiences of sensibility that have historically been established as symbolic assets.

The most significant insight, however, emerged during the third meeting. The question was asked: “Do you know any deaf poets, artists, or writers?” A collective silence opened up an identity-related chasm. It was not merely a matter of lacking access to the hegemonic canon, but of the total absence of references to deaf authorship. This void prevents the formation of mirrors and aesthetic affiliations. To address this emptiness, the work of Cláudio Mourão, a deaf poet and professor at UFRGS, was presented, specifically the visual poem “Releitura do Campo de Girassóis,” produced by #CasaLibras. Before the screening, the question was posed: “If poetry isn’t written in words, can it still be poetry?” The reaction was profound. One participant stated: “I didn’t know a deaf person could be a poet.” This statement did not express naive surprise, but rather reflected the lack of historical recognition of deaf people as art producers. From there, questions of mapping and identity arose: “If we do not know our own artists, who will tell our story?” “Can deaf art exist if deaf people themselves do not recognize it?”

These inquiries highlighted that the central issue is not limited to a lack of content or a scarcity of cultural productions in LIBRAS aimed at deaf people; rather, it concerns an injustice of recognition (Fraser, 2022) that operates by hindering not only access but the very possibility of envisioning oneself as a creative subject, as a poet. Thus, the workshop evolved from a mere space for cultural transmission into a mechanism for a becoming-creator: a field where, beyond simply showcasing artists, the capacity to engage in art is restored, opening up spaces for the emergence of deaf authorship.

This axis highlights that artistic-cultural literacy, within the context of the emergence and inscription of deaf identity, demands far more than simply incorporating LIBRAS into curricula or expanding access to cultural goods. Above all, it requires the historical recognition of deaf individuals as producers of culture, art, and knowledge. As Deleuze and Guattari (1992) assert, art emerges when a body is traversed by forces (affections and affects) that shift it from previously established positions, driving processes of creation and becoming. From this perspective, aesthetic experience is not limited to contemplation but constitutes a field for the production of existence and the invention of possible worlds. For the deaf community, historically rendered invisible regarding its unique modes of artistic and literary expression, artistic-cultural literacy entails the possibility of occupying spaces of authorship, circulation, and social recognition for its creative works. It is, therefore, a matter not merely of ensuring access to canonical culture (though that is also included), but of affirming the legitimacy of deaf art and literature as integral expressions of Brazilian cultural heritage. In this context, partnership with deaf associations plays a fundamental role, serving as a space for encounter, creation, and strengthening deaf cultural literacy practices, thereby fostering artistic-literary experiences that help value the language, culture, and unique forms of existence of the deaf community.

Axis 2: Deferred textuality as deaf authorship

The second analytical axis focuses on the poetic creation processes developed by the participants, particularly the group responsible for the poetic reinterpretation in LIBRAS. The analysis of Cláudio Mourão’s poetry revealed structural elements of deferred textuality that the participants appropriated in their own creations.

A collective analysis of the poem “Releitura do Campo de Girassóis” was proposed. Conceptually inspired by the theoretical work of Deleuze and Guattari (1992), the participants explored the perspective of art and literature as fields for the creation of sensations. In the book Conversações, Deleuze (1992) describes intercessors as external agents that mobilize acts of creation. Thus, the intercessor acts as a force inhabiting the in-between space, serving as a mediator for the experience.

Deleuze and Guattari (1992, p. 213) state that art constitutes a field of creation because it is capable of generating percepts—blocks of sensations and affects that are not limited to representation but act as forces. These forces do not necessarily translate into rational understanding, but rather into sensible effects that traverse body and thought, opening up new perceptual and existential possibilities.

By proposing a collective exercise in visualizing and aesthetically appreciating the signed poetry, the aim was precisely to mobilize this sensible field of creation as a space for accessing, producing, and sharing experiences. The goal was not merely to understand the work’s content, but to feel with it, to allow oneself to be affected by the intensities mobilized in its composition.

In this section, we present a Portuguese description of the poetic movements present in the poem used in this study with the participants. Cláudio Mourão’s poetic work emerges from a process of transcreation inspired by Van Gogh’s painting. The concept of transcreation, proposed by Campos (2006), is adopted here as a creative act that establishes authorship in the process of moving from one language to another. More than a simple translation, transcreation incorporates cultural, aesthetic, and expressive elements into the new version, serving as a creative gesture that reinterprets meanings and generates new forms of signification. Although Cláudio Mourão’s aim was not to construct a translation or version, moving a text from one language to another, but rather to create poetry inspired by a Van Gogh painting, one observes an adaptation of the original artwork incorporated into the poetic creation in LIBRAS. This production, while not a description of the canvas, carries elements of a version while simultaneously establishing an original poetic text in LIBRAS.

It begins with the poem’s opening, marked by the body’s presence and the poet’s initial act of embodiment. As the material is video-recorded in LIBRAS, the body remains constantly present in the recording. Unlike writing, where we do not see the author, but rather the graphic representation of their reflections, a production in LIBRAS makes the author’s body visible. Marking the transition between the narrative text of his introduction and the start of the poem presents a challenge that required careful execution by the poet.

Cláudio Mourão chooses to effect this transition through a bodily pause: he closes his eyes, looks down, and falls silent. This gesture of silencing and introspection signals an entry into poetic time, establishing a different rhythm. It is at this moment that he becomes, in himself, the poet’s voice, his body now becoming poetry itself, expressed through his hands. He slowly lifts his head and looks at the viewer, focusing his gaze on the camera. With this gesture, the poet’s presence is established. The poetic text has begun. The body marks the constitutive elements of the genre.

As LIBRAS is a visual-gestural language, a modality requiring the physical presence of the body, it becomes necessary to create a distinct aesthetic interplay between camera angles and gaze to signal the discursive and stylistic positions of each genre. Following the poetic introduction, the poet’s body, now imbued with the text, shifts laterally; even when facing the camera, his gaze becomes unfocused. This shift in gaze narrates the poet’s immersion in his own act of expression—an introspective dive into the text. In sign languages, this act of averting the gaze serves as an expressive marker distinguishing poetic text from other discursive genres.

The poetic piece opens against a black background but takes on color through impressionistic editing. At the end, a yellow background signals the conclusion of the work, introducing the color that characterizes the poetry of resistance created by Cláudio Mourão: a field of sunflowers transformed into poetry expressed through the hands. Cláudio Mourão concludes the poem by embodying the very color it painted upon him: yellow. Only after the poem ends does the poet re-establish eye contact with the viewer, directing his gaze back toward the camera. This gesture of reconnecting with the other’s gaze symbolically marks the offering of the poetry in LIBRAS.

These elements—stages, procedures, and creative strategies—show a commitment to the audience and reveal aesthetic and stylistic traits characteristic of the “LIBRAS poetry” genre, which demands specific modes of composition. Video recording imposes rules that must be taken into account when composing the recorded material.

The group responsible for the poetic reinterpretation incorporated these elements into their creative process. They chose to work in pairs, although everyone contributed to the poetic choices. Two deaf participants were selected for the final performance: one with a background in LIBRAS Studies and another without higher education, who stated that he had never encountered poetry before. This decision proved particularly impactful. Initially, the participant without formal training reported feeling very insecure, describing “butterflies in his stomach,” because he had never engaged with this type of LIBRAS text and could not imagine himself capable of producing and presenting something publicly. With the group’s support, and especially that of his colleague with a background in LIBRAS Studies, who encouraged and accompanied him during the performance, he gradually gained confidence throughout the process.

After the showcase, this same participant shared that the experience had deeply moved him. He described getting goosebumps while producing and performing poetry and, above all, while participating in discussions about the poetic meanings within Cláudio Mourão’s work. In his words, the experience was transformative, revealing the formative power of art and collectivity in fostering a sense of belonging and authorship.

This account highlights a fundamental dimension of deferred textuality: its appropriation is neither intuitive nor spontaneous but requires active multimodal literacy processes (Canale, 2023; Martins & Peluso, 2025). The ability to plan discourse while distancing oneself from the moment of utterance is a practice that must be learned and cultivated (Martins & Peluso, 2025). In this sense, video recording is not merely a technology for documentation but a device that enables the emergence of new forms of authorship.

Analysis of the poetic works further revealed the incorporation of deaf cultural elements into the creations. Participants employed classifiers, character embodiment, and the visual rhythm characteristic of sign languages, elements absent from poetry in spoken languages. This distinctiveness reinforces the argument of Martins and Peluso (2025) that deferred textuality in LIBRAS is not merely an adaptation of written forms but constitutes a unique materiality with specific linguistic and aesthetic characteristics.

The participants’ experience of authorship aligns with what Deleuze and Guattari (1992) term the “creation of sensations.” The poetry was not understood solely through its content but was felt as an experience that traverses the body and generates affects. The participant who reported getting goosebumps exemplifies this dimension, as art operates beyond the cognitive realm, mobilizing bodily and affective intensities.

Axis 3: Art as an intercessor and a political right

The third analytical axis emerges from the work of the group responsible for the artistic reinterpretation and the group that addressed the linguistic and cultural rights of deaf people. The outputs of these groups intersected significantly, revealing how art functions as an intercessor for political demands.

The participants organized themselves into three groups, each with up to 10 members. Three complementary activities were proposed that link art, literature, deaf cultural markers, and human rights. The first group was responsible for analyzing the poem “Releitura do Campo de Girassóis,” created by Cláudio Mourão as part of the #CasaLibras initiative. The proposal included, as a final step, the creation of a poetic piece in LIBRAS, inspired by the sensations evoked by the original work.

The second group was tasked with producing an artistic reinterpretation of the poem, drawing inspiration from Van Gogh’s works while integrating deaf visual and cultural references. The proposal aimed to explore the expressive power of the visual arts as a realm of sensitive, culturally grounded creation from a deaf perspective.

The third group was tasked with reflecting on the rights of the deaf community by surveying the laws, policies, and actions that shape the landscape of deaf linguistic and cultural rights in Brazil. This group also played a role in engaging with other groups, providing conceptual and legal insights to enrich the poetic and artistic creations. Finally, the group presented a summary of rights already secured and those still requiring advocacy.

The artistic group, composed of both deaf and hearing individuals, developed a visual reinterpretation of the poem in pencil and gouache. Influenced by the group’s reflections on deaf rights, they drew an analogy between the sunflower and LIBRAS: the flower’s opening was depicted as the emergence of the right to use sign language in social life. This choice was not merely symbolic, as it demonstrated a sophisticated political understanding. During discussions, participants noted that although LIBRAS has been legally recognized since 2002, there remains a “difficulty regarding social participation in spaces where LIBRAS is neither known nor socially recognized” (female deaf participant, 32 years old). The image of the opening sunflower was thus used to represent both the legal achievements and the remaining challenges in their implementation.

The group focusing specifically on linguistic rights produced posters featuring statements about legal milestones and persistent challenges. Among the elements highlighted were: (i) Law No. 10,436/2002 and Decree No. 5,626/2005; (ii) Law No. 14,191/2021, which incorporated the bilingual education modality into the Law of Directives and Bases of Education; (iii) the shortage of interpreters in various contexts; (iv) the difficulty in accessing information in LIBRAS; and (v) the lack of accessible cultural productions.

The articulation between these productions and the artistic reinterpretation shows how art operated as an intermediary, in the Deleuzian sense of the term. Van Gogh’s work and Cláudio Mourão’s poetry were not only objects of aesthetic appreciation, but mobilized creative processes that led to political demands. The participants not only reproduced artistic forms but also reinvented them by articulating them through their own experiences of exclusion and struggle for recognition. The production highlighted, at the same time, limitations and advances. It indicated the persistence of barriers to full linguistic access across different social spaces, highlighting the ongoing necessary struggle for recognition and equity. The participants pointed out challenges still facing the deaf community regarding the social participation of deaf people in cultural spaces and access to art and literature.

The political dimension of art is articulated in Fraser’s argument (2022) for the required connection between cultural recognition and economic redistribution. Participants understood that access to culture in LIBRAS is not merely a symbolic issue, but is directly related to possibilities for social and economic inclusion. As one deaf participant stated: “We cannot study in any course we want and get jobs because we do not have access to the same education.” The final art exhibition, open to the community, constituted a space for the visibility not only of the productions developed but also of deaf people themselves as political subjects.

The exhibition of posters produced by the participants, articulated with the poetic and artistic productions developed throughout the workshops, constituted an act of resistance, visibility, and affirmation of deaf difference as a cultural and political value. This practice is close to what Martins and Lopes (2024) advocate when proposing the concept of beyond-accessibility, understood as the expansion of rights policies beyond access, contemplating the recognition of deaf existence in its linguistic, cultural, and community specificity.

The productions analyzed highlight this dimension by demonstrating that the participants not only claimed entry into established cultural spaces but also affirmed the need for the production, appreciation, and circulation of artistic expressions originating in deaf communities. In this process, three main results stand out: (i) the production of artistic works inspired by the poetry presented; (ii) the poetic recreation and reworking in LIBRAS, mobilizing processes of authorship and aesthetic creation; and (iii) the elaboration of posters with statements related to the linguistic and cultural rights of deaf people, emphasizing the importance of bilingual education, acknowledging LIBRAS, and expanding cultural spaces that are accessible and are constituted from the visual and linguistic experience of deaf people.

Figure 1 presents two images taken during activities conducted at the deaf association. In the first, a group of participants is observed engaged in appreciation, discussion, and poetic reworking in LIBRAS; in the second, a group works on creating one of the posters produced from reflections sparked by the workshops. The images illustrate how shared practices enabled the articulation of artistic expression, aesthetic creation, critical reflection, and the claim to rights, highlighting the power of art as a space for deaf cultural literacy, political engagement, and the strengthening of the deaf community’s identity.

Figure 1
Images of the proposed intervention

Description: Figure composed of two color photographs of an artistic-cultural workshop held in a room. In the first photograph, a wide shot shows ten people, their faces out of focus, organized into two groups. In the foreground, five people are seated around a table and watch a poetic production in LIBRAS on a laptop. On the table are a pink poster board, colored pencils, and other artistic materials. In the background, another five people are gathered in front of another laptop and a projection on the wall. In the second photograph, three people appear in a close-up shot around a table, partially or fully, with their faces blurred. A person in a pink blouse uses a paintbrush to paint on yellow cardboard. The artwork features large hand-like shapes painted in green, blue, and red, as well as a sunflower, small drawings, and handwritten words. Brushes, paints, pencils, scissors, and other materials used in the workshop are arranged on the table.

Although we have highlighted challenges that persist for the deaf community, the participants also offered an optimistic perspective: following the legal recognition of LIBRAS, there are signs of greater openness to deaf life across various social spheres, underscoring the need to consolidate these achievements within the framework of human rights.

Final Considerations

Using a cartographic approach, this study analyzed an artistic-cultural intervention involving deaf children, adolescents, and young adults at the São Carlos Deaf Association, investigating how aesthetic-poetic practices in LIBRAS intersect with linguistic and cultural rights. The analysis revealed three fundamental dimensions: the historical lack of recognition for deaf artists and cultural productions; deferred textuality as an authorship practice requiring specific forms of literacy; and art as a vehicle for political advocacy.

The theoretical contribution lies in the articulation between deferred textuality (Peluso, 2020, 2022), linguistic rights (Fraser, 2022; Lodi, 2013; Martins & Lopes, 2024), and art as the creation of sensations (Deleuze & Guattari, 1992). This articulation demonstrates that the right to culture in LIBRAS is not realized merely through translations or interpreters; rather, it requires cultural literacy policies that promote exposure to artistic productions from childhood, recognition of works originating within deaf communities, and the development of authors competent in LIBRAS-based textualities.

The analysis demonstrated that the logic of accessibility, predominant in inclusive policies, is insufficient to guarantee linguistic and cultural rights. It is necessary to move beyond accessibility, recognizing deaf difference not as a deficit, but as a legitimate form of existence that demands specific educational and cultural structures.

Practical implications point to four courses of action: (i) the incorporation of LIBRAS-based productions into curricula starting in early childhood education; (ii) teacher training that encompasses an understanding of deferred textuality; (iii) cultural policies that foster works in LIBRAS; (iv) strengthening associations for the deaf as spaces for cultural development and the resistance of deaf identity.

Among the limitations, the study was conducted in a single context, which restricts the generalizability of the findings. The short duration of the intervention (12 weeks) limited the depth of analysis regarding certain dimensions. Future studies should include children’s experiences, broaden the range of contexts, and conduct longitudinal research on cultural literacy in LIBRAS, especially in light of the implementation of Law No. 14,191/2021. Although this research is situated in a specific context and does not aim to generalize its findings, the movements mapped out here allow for several significant reflections. The results indicate that access to culture in LIBRAS constitutes a fundamental human right; realizing this right requires policies and practices that acknowledge deaf difference beyond perspectives limited to accessibility alone. In this context, art emerges as a powerful force for creation and the generation of sensory experiences, acting as an intermediary in processes of subjectivation; it serves as a privileged space for identity affirmation, cultural expression, and political advocacy. Thus, the project contributed to strengthening LIBRAS as a language for aesthetic production, community belonging, and social participation, fostering collective educational experiences committed to the principles of human rights, linguistic justice, and the recognition of deaf difference.

Acknowledgments

São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) for funding the development of the research that supported the production of the poetry video and the artistic practices used in the activity.

Specialization in Education in Human Rights at the Federal University of São Paulo (UNIFESP) for conducting the specialization course via Distance Learning (EaD), with support from the Open University of Brazil (UAB) system within the partner institution, whose activities supported the development of the research.

• Support and funding:
  São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP): Grant No. 2023/12886-5.
• Research ethics:
  The study was submitted to and approved by the Ethics Committee: CAAE 78166124.7.0000.5504 - Opinion Number: 6,803,836.
• Use of AI:
  During the preparation of the article, the authors used the ChatGPT tool (OpenAI) in January 2026 to: (i) review the text, assisting with grammar, spelling, and improvements to cohesion, clarity, and writing flow, particularly in the abstract, to meet the required word count; and (ii) format bibliographic references according to APA (American Psychological Association) standards. The authors declare that they reviewed, validated, edited, and supervised the final text, ensuring its originality, accuracy, and ethical integrity, and assume full responsibility for the publication’s content.
• Textual review:
  Bibliographic standardization (APA 7^th Ed.), preparation, and textual review in Portuguese: [e-mail]
  English version and revision: Henrique Akira Ishii [e-mail]
• 1
  From now on, only the term LIBRAS will be used to refer to the Brazilian Sign Language.
• 2
  The recurring use of the concept beyond-accessibility throughout this text is intentional and does not constitute a stylistic redundancy. Its repetition serves as a theoretical-political strategy for emphasis, aiming to highlight the limitations of policies centered exclusively on accessibility and the logic of disability. Although advances in the field of Special Education have fostered significant guarantees regarding access, accommodations, and social participation, such measures do not always acknowledge the linguistic and cultural status of deaf communities. In this regard, the systematic revisiting of the concept seeks to underscore the persistent obstacles to the realization of linguistic rights, the social circulation of artistic and literary works in sign languages, and the recognition of deaf art and literature as legitimate cultural heritage. The expression beyond-accessibility thus marks the need to expand public policies toward an agenda that recognizes the linguistic, cultural, and identity-related specificities of deaf people, moving beyond perspectives limited to adaptation, functional inclusion, or mere access.
• 3
  The use of italics throughout the text highlights central concepts underpinning the research. These concepts, inspired particularly by the contributions of Deleuze and Guattari, serve as theoretical-conceptual triggers for understanding the art, culture, and processes of subjectivation explored in this study. Analytical concepts fundamental to the investigation include beyond-accessibility, deaf ethos, visual ethos, and affect.
• 4
  This investigative practice is linked to the outreach activity “Oficina na Associação dos Surdos de São Carlos Jurandyra Fehr: ‘Arte-Literatura Surda e Direitos Humanos’” (“Workshop at the Jurandyra Fehr São Carlos Deaf Association: ‘Deaf Art, Literature, and Human Rights’” – PROEX Process No. 23112.018782/2025-38), conducted as the specialization program’s final activity. It is also part of an ongoing research project supported by FAPESP (Process No. 2023/12886-5), approved by the Ethics Committee under CAAE 78166124.7.0000.5504 and Opinion No. 6803836. All participants were duly registered for the outreach activity and authorized their participation in the study, which is integrated into the umbrella project funded by FAPESP.
• 5
  The poem used in its entirety is available on the official #CasaLibras YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZwZWwEdmCs&t=306s

Data availability:

The content underlying the research text is contained within the manuscript.

References

• Albres, N. A. (2020). Os espaços da Libras em contextos artístico-culturais e literários e a formação de tradutores e intérpretes de Libras-português. Linguagem & Ensino, 23(4), 1248-1273. https://doi.org/10.15210/rle.v23i4.18467
  » https://doi.org/10.15210/rle.v23i4.18467
• Campos, H. (2006). Da tradução como criação e como crítica. In H. Campos, Metalinguagem e outras metas: ensaios de teoria & crítica literária (pp. 31-48). Perspectiva.
• Canale, G. (2023). A multimodal and ethnographic approach to textbook discourse Routledge.
• Comparato, B. K. (2023). Introdução e fundamentos filosóficos e históricos dos direitos humanos e a construção dos marcos regulatórios [Texto-base não publicado]. Curso de Educação em Direitos Humanos, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Universidade Aberta do Brasil.
• Decreto nº 5.626, de 22 de dezembro de 2005. (2005, 23 de dezembro). Regulamenta a Lei nº 10.436, de 24 de abril de 2002, que dispõe sobre a Língua Brasileira de Sinais – Libras, e o art. 18 da Lei nº 10.098, de 19 de dezembro de 2000. Diário Oficial da União, seção 1 http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2004-2006/2005/decreto/d5626.htm
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2004-2006/2005/decreto/d5626.htm
• Deleuze, G. (1992). Conversações: 1972-1990 (P. P. Pelbart, trad.). Editora 34.
• Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1992). O que é a filosofia? (B. Prado Jr. & A. A. Muñoz, trads.). Editora 34.
• Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1997). Mil platôs: capitalismo e esquizofrenia (A. L. Oliveira & L. C. Leão, trads., Vol. 2). Editora 34.
• Fraser, N. (2022). Justiça interrompida: reflexões críticas sobre a condição “pós-socialista” (A. C. Lopes & N. Bressiani). Boitempo.
• Lei nº 10.436, de 24 de abril de 2002. (2002, 25 de abril). Dispõe sobre a Língua Brasileira de Sinais – Libras e dá outras providências. Diário Oficial da União, seção 1 http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/2002/l10436.htm
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/2002/l10436.htm
• Lodi, A. C. B. (2013). Educação bilíngue para surdos e inclusão segundo a Política Nacional de Educação Especial e o Decreto 5.626/05. Educação e Pesquisa, 39(1), 49-63. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1517-97022013000100004
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S1517-97022013000100004
• Lopes, M. C. (2007). Surdez & educação Autêntica.
• Machado, E. E., Teixeira, D. E., & Galasso, B. J. B. (2017). Concepção do primeiro curso online de Pedagogia em uma perspectiva bilíngue Libras-Português. Revista Brasileira de Educação Especial, 23(1), 21-36. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-65382317000100003
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-65382317000100003
• Martins, V. R. O. (2020). Reflexões sobre a educação bilíngue de surdos em escolas inclusivas nos anos iniciais do ensino fundamental [Relatório de pesquisa]. FAPESP.
• Martins, V. R. O. (2023). Educação infantil e anos iniciais do ensino fundamental: Educação bilíngue de surdos em escolas inclusivas [Relatório parcial de pós-doutorado]. Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos.
• Martins, V. R. O. (2024). Educação infantil e anos iniciais do ensino fundamental: educação bilíngue de surdos em escolas inclusivas [Relatório final de pós-doutorado]. Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos.
• Martins, V. R. O., & Lopes, M. C. (2024). Direito linguístico-educacional para alunos surdos e o “além-acessibilidade”. Cadernos de Pesquisa, 54, e10710. https://publicacoes.fcc.org.br/cp/article/view/10710
  » https://publicacoes.fcc.org.br/cp/article/view/10710
• Martins, V. R. O., & Peluso, L. (2025). Textualidade diferida na educação de surdos: conceitos e práticas pedagógicas. In L. C. R. Nascimento, & A. S. Nogueira (Orgs.), Linguagens e diferenças (pp. 143-171). Pedro & João Editores.
• Olson, D. R. (1991). La cultura escrita como actividad metalingüística. In D. R. Olson, & N. Torrance (Eds.), Cultura escrita y oralidad (pp. 333-358). Gedisa.
• Pagni, P. A., & Martins, V. R. O. (2019). Corpo e expressividade como marcas constitutivas da diferença ou do ethos surdo. Revista Educação Especial, 32, e88. https://doi.org/10.5902/1984686X38222
  » https://doi.org/10.5902/1984686X38222
• Peluso, L. (2007). Estudios interculturales y cultura escrita: algunas problematizaciones en torno al concepto de escritura y de sujeto letrado. In Entre el sueño y la realidad: Nuestra América Latina alfabetizada (pp. 313-320). Sociedad de Dislexia del Uruguay.
• Peluso, L. (2019). Considerações teóricas sobre a educação de surdos: especial, bilíngue, inclusiva. Revista Educação Especial, 32, e87. https://doi.org/10.5902/1984686X38329
  » https://doi.org/10.5902/1984686X38329
• Peluso, L. (2020). La escritura y los sordos: entre representar, registrar/grabar, describir y computar Tuilsu.
• Peluso, L. (2022). Escritura, videograbaciones y cultura letrada. In V. R. O. Martins, R. C. Torres, & G. Nichols (Orgs.), #CasaLibras: educação de surdos, Libras e infância (pp. 115-128). Pedro & João Editores.
• Santaella, L. (2012). Leitura de imagens Melhoramentos.
• Silva, P. L. S., & Paraíso, M. A. (2023). Cartografia para pesquisar currículos e infâncias em dissidências: um exercício experimental de invenção. Acta Scientiarum. Education, 45, e65889. https://doi.org/10.4025/actascieduc.v45i1.65889
  » https://doi.org/10.4025/actascieduc.v45i1.65889
• Skliar, C. (1998). A surdez: um olhar sobre as diferenças Mediação.
• Soler, P. S. (2022). Relações entre línguas e a experiência do aprender surdo [Dissertação de mestrado, Universidade Federal de São Carlos]. Repositório Institucional da UFSCar. https://repositorio.ufscar.br/bitstream/handle/ufscar/16081/SOLER_Priscila_2022.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  » https://repositorio.ufscar.br/bitstream/handle/ufscar/16081/SOLER_Priscila_2022.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
• Soler, P. S., & Martins, V. R. O. (2022). Língua portuguesa como língua adicional para surdos e o seu aprender em articulação com a Libras como língua matriz. Revista Educação Especial, 35 https://doi.org/10.5902/1984686X64603
  » https://doi.org/10.5902/1984686X64603
• Soler, P. S., & Martins, V. R. O. (2024). Língua matriz & língua adicional: relações entre línguas e a experiência do aprender surdo Dialética.
• Veiga-Neto, A., & Lopes, M. C. (2011). Inclusão, exclusão, in/exclusão. Verve, 20, 121-135.

Edited by

• Editors in charge:
  Associate Editor: Eduardo José Manzini https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7420-6146
  Editor-in-Chief: Helena Sampaio https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1759-4875

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  28 Aug 2026
• Date of issue
  2026

History

• Received
  19 Feb 2026
• Reviewed
  16 June 2026
• Accepted
  01 July 2026