from pariah to boring neighbor

[VicNicSor]

Сase in point is the breathtaking speed, and, I would add, needed change with regards to homosexuality and it's social acceptance. Homosexuality has gone from being strictly illegal to socially accepted in a matter of decades. While not necessarily all aspects of the gay lifestyle is universally loved — the hyper sexualization of pride parades for example — homosexuals have basically gone from pariah to boring neighbor in the blink of an eye.
YouTube video

Since the boldfaced part doesn't seem to be an expression — Google finds nothing, although the meaning is clear — I wonder if zero article here seems the most natural choice.

For example, would these be acceptable:
from pariahs to boring neighbors
from the pariah to the boring neighbor

Thanks.

 

[Uncle Jack]

"Go from X to Y" does not use articles or plurals.

While it might be possible to justify this by saying that both "pariah" and "boring neighbour" are descriptions of homosexuals, rather than direct references to homosexuals themselves, I don't think this sort of argument would stand up to scrutiny, and I would merely be inventing a reason for something that may not have any reason.

 

[VicNicSor]

"Go from X to Y" does not use articles or plurals.

For example: they went from pauper to nouveau riche, would you use it in the same way, without articles or pulars, too?..

 

[Uncle Jack]

For example: they went from pauper to nouveau riche, would you use it in the same way, without articles or pulars, too?..

Yes. Here, though, I can see someone using "paupers", especially if they were literally paupers to begin with.

 

[VicNicSor]

One question. Would all the above be true for a singular subject: (unlike the OP or the example in #3)?

he went from pariah to boring neighbor

he went from pauper to nouveau riche

 

[Uncle Jack]

Yes, and as with #3, "a pauper" is a possible alternative if he started out a literal pauper.

 

[VicNicSor]

"a pauper" is a possible alternative if he started out a literal pauper.

But then it should be "a nouveau riche" too, for a match, right?

 

[london calling]

But then it should be "a nouveau riche" too, for a match, right?

No, because you can only say (the) nouveau riche (plural).

 

[VicNicSor]

Thank you both.

 

[lingobingo]

I would simply read it as implying: gone from [the status of] pariah to [that of] boring neighbor

 

[VicNicSor]

Thank you.