Are people more concerned with changing the world these days, or what you can watch on television?

If you detect from someone's tone of voice that they expect an original response, is it not more apt to reply generically?

If someone says they worked underground for 6 months, a sharp follow up question is not, "were you looking for an aquifer?"

Need to remember when friends have children to ask them questions related to how they are adjusting to life with those children before asking them questions concerning whether or not they recently won chicken wing cook-offs.

Pose

There is a peculiar output from time to time although its precision is comprised by its accuracy. No need to bring that up, we're aware. Yes, we've covered that, we know, at ease. Basically, the tangent Smyke's been working loosely aligns itself with three of the major themes developed in his earlier prose but is divergent enough to potentially be classified as new ground. If it is indeed new then we can be confident that at least 85% of the projected pilot has hit the mark and can be counted upon for more verdant televisual pastures. To a lighthouse or some such thing. The characters seek change within although their motivation is tangled up in metaphor. We certainly appreciate the ways in which the metaphors abound in a juxtaposed yet complimentary fashion but are continually confounded by the slide. Sliding so often, slipshod, ramshackle. I'm unaware if he's accomplished that as of yet for I've only read the first 20 pages but will let you know after I investigate the content with increased rigour. Certainly, there is a fashionable interest and not simply a bizarre intrinsic infatuation: this I can assure you. But if you can't be content to wait for our analysis of the finished project I'm at a loss as to how I can continue to answer your questions.