Antonio Fausto Neto 284 of such a distant occurrence, according to the testimony of a professor: “I am devastated; I came to the campus for a meet- ing of the collegiate in order to deal with the evaluation of my research project, whose report I will have to send to the funding agency in the next few days.” The pandemic, as an event, over- lapped the managerial model of knowledge production, merging with the rationalities of the university environment in terms of management, research, teaching, extension, etc. Another sym- bol of deprivation of contact – involving suffering, death, help- lessness – occupies the university and the foundations of the experience/coexistence of its machinery. The university was urged to make displacements, overcome silences, face instability for a resumption of a movement that would allow the emergence of creative interventions, generating (who knows?) another dy- namic that would allow the reestablishment of agglomeration and social contact. The academic institution, when suddenly faced with the interruption of its activities, suffered a kind of “evacuation” operation generating mutations in its communicational action: what was a fertile environment permeated by energies that dy- namized different circuits of academic “fights” suffered a “stop- page shock,” giving rise to the assembly of new strategies that could restore, even partially, the circuits of academic training, re- search, laboratory actions, etc. What was, until then, a trajectory of routines submitted to academic calendars and protocols was paralyzed or even disjointed. But, somehow, such a discouraging reality would constitute the generating source of human, inven- tive, and intellectual inputs, redirecting the communicational actions of the university. The pandemic, somehow, is no longer a problem seen in a watertight way, becoming a source that gener- ates elaborations that give rise to new ways of interventions by the university in the daily life of the pandemic. The brief descrip- tion of records that we will make later can only be understood if we consider the importance of aspects of mediatization as a revitalizing dimension of the university as knowledge produc- tion. If previously it would follow self-referential routines, later, it would shrink to defend itself from the virus, and then, it would re-potentiate its human, technical, and intellectual capital, to re- invent or, then, retrace its path from the recognition of its own
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjEzNzYz