The author who to say that each one of our fears has a reason of being. that many fears perhaps can finish in the instant where we decide to take a route certain in life. Further details can be found at Morgan Stanley, an internet resource. She is necessary to have a north, to have objectives so that the life if does not become direction empty. In stories of the two authors we perceive that the personages do not possess clear objectives of life. They are apticos, without route, interest for nothing. In ' ' a smile is Little para..com it is same the name of it? ' ' Gildemar Bridges wants to question the solitude in set. It is an excellent story to be read and analyzed with the intention to perceive the history of a man who exactly being in a party if feels solitary. In this context we perceive that the solitude possesss on characteristics to the interior world of each person.
is not enough to possess an agitated exterior if it exempts of the solitude. Perhaps this is the difference between stories. While Abreu (2005) speaks of alone solitude, with tdio, melancholy and pain, Bridges (2008) discourse concerning a solitude in set. Something that is strange of if to understand, because somebody is only felt, being folloied, in collective? In the story of Abreu (2005) the personage did not want to leave house, insisted on to take refuge itself in its home, to the step that in Bridges (2008) the protagonist wanted to leave, was to a party, talked with a young woman, it was in a public place. The Lui personage ran away from its problems through drugs and cigarette, no longer story of Bridges (2008) the youngster if the cigarette smoke said avesso and until it hesitated in being close to somebody that smoked. They are two stories that approach the solitude with differentiated aspects, with personages of different personalities, different contexts but with a subject in common.