We.

[tectak]

I would suggest that you first of all make up your mind, as to whether your aim is either 1) to communicate lucidly what is in your mind, to the reader, so that s/he understands as nearly as it is ever possible, the 'meaning'; or 2) to put out something, with a few pointers, from which the reader will take away what s/he will, with little reference to whatever your point was.

I do not agree with tectak about 'the shallow' , 'cajoling' 'extolling' etc. It is quite common to convert adjectives into nouns, e.g.-'the good, the bad and the indifferent'. It is precisely the shallow part of me, at any rate, which does a lot of cajoling: it used to cajole me into having just one cigarette; another beer on the way home, and much else. It likes extolling, too: it tells me that this or that is brilliant, the very thing -- and requires some other bit of brain to pour cold water over it.

Welcome, and everything-- but your piece doers need a revamp.

Hi abu,
I don't agree with me either but it was the definitive that rankled. The good, the bad and the indifferent is categorisation...groups if you like. In this piece "the shallow" is self-referencing and as such it is implicitly a singularity...so I question its use as a noun. That is to say, you can no more ask what is a shallow than you can ask what is a good or a bad or an indifferent. Clarity before confusion everytime for me else we all translate ourselves in to the mad....see what I mean?
Best,
tectak