Weaveeing the critical critical A literary he was one of the first types that had appeared with the intention to analyze workmanships as books, romances, poetry, among others literary manifestations. It if of the one in the measure where consecrated authors make critical of its colleagues or its proper ones as he happened with Victor Hugo, Zola and Machado de Assis. Thus being, literary critic, – other critics exist: as of cinema, theater etc then, he starts to be the professional who evaluates, he judges, he investigates and he comments the literary compositions. So that this happens is necessary all a preparation technician and the knowledge of the diverse schools and styles. She is necessary to know to evaluate the workmanship, the creation, without intending to weave a picture psychological of the author. However, it is in the subjectivity that if unmasks the philosophical position, cultural politics and of the author. Face to the workmanship, we can get the biographical information, the historical consideraes on the social political situation of the moment, the society, thought of the intellectuals.
We can say that, many times, are about true ' ' garimpo' '. It is not to toa that the critics are, most of the time, badly seen, criticized with hardness and enclosed in one of the types of critics: the pretense critics (that sporadical they weave some critical one), the writers/theoreticians, those that methodically are turned to the study of the literary creations, and those that never if had ventured in the branch of the critical one and do not accept no intromission in its workmanship. It is well certain that still the critical one of the mutual compliment exists, critical the most emotional one of what multicriteria and of ' ' preparation of manioc meal-prazeres' '. However, in critical literary, we must not have the pretension to know all the answers to the text/workmanship inquired – the important one is to possess a correct intuition concerning these answers.
The comment will be before all controlled and systematic one so that a valid instrument of scientific inquiry became, where occurred a careful planning of the work, determining with antecedence what and as to observe. The object of study of this comment will be the behavior of the professors and pupils ahead of the use of the playful one as pedagogical resource in the education process/learning, in the direction to verify as the professors make use of the playful one in the lessons. This comment will make possible a personal and narrow contact with the study object that provided many advantages. It was disclosed to the people who had contributed for research the intention of the same one, becoming explicit the paper of the researcher, who was a participant observer, and the intentions of this study. To the side of the comment the interview for being will be used also a basic instrument for the collection of data. It half-will be structuralized, that she will uncurl herself from a basic project, but not applied rigidly, that she allowed to make some necessary adaptations, established in a script with the great flexibility.
The focus of the interview directed to the professors will be to identify practical the pedagogical one, to analyze if the professors they are really intent to the influence that the playful one possesss in the development of the learning and if they use the playful one, making a parallel with the contents programmarians. Already in the interview with the pupils the focus was to perceive if they obtain to understand the content given with bigger easiness, being thus developed the reasoning-logical of pleasant form. The interview with the professors of the institution must transcorrer in a pleasant climate and of mutual acceptance, where information had flowed in considerable way and notable, allowing corrections, clarifications and adaptations will become that it more efficient in the attainment of the desired information, gaining life when if to initiate the dialogue between the interviewer and the interviewed one.