In his 2005 article “Consider the Lobster and Other Essays”, Wallace brings it to the attention of people that lobsters are the one creature that are usually cooked while still alive. Although many people find this practice unproblematic simply believing that lobsters cannot feel pain. This practice causes Wallace to go into observation and research about the life of a lobster and if they can feel pain or not while being boiled alive. Moreover, this observation leads Wallace to question our justifications for eating lobsters, and indeed our eating of animals’ altogether. Furthermore, within the article, Wallace speaks on intricate ideas of pain and morality and human acceptance of animal cruelty.
Imagine being boiled alive like lobsters, “scraping the sides of the kettle as it thrashes around” (Wallace 62). David Foster Wallace doesn’t hold back with his use of details and imagery as he engages the audience describing the Maine Lobster Festival in his article “Consider the Lobster”, which is published in Gourmet Magazine. Wallace uses the title, “Consider the Lobster” not just as the title but as his thesis. He wants to get the reader to think constantly throughout the article about the morality of eating a lobster. Wallace uses rhetoric to describe what occurs at the Maine Lobster Festival as well as the ethics of lobster eating and he does this in his article effectively.
From personal experience, I sense acidic undercurrents, a bursting bubble, and a rusted infrastructure; a western world that is growing, yet sinking. All these forms of decay make me speculate on how things got to be this way, but also what I should do in an attempt to change the tide. In David Foster Wallace’s “Consider the Lobster,” I am consistently puzzled on his concept regarding animals’ ‘right to life’ deeming some sort of equality in animal lives compared to human lives. A selection from this text that that sticks out to me and could stand alone as the main point of this text is when Wallace talks about how people would never stand around at a food festival where cows are publicly slaughtered. He says, “Try to imagine a Nebraska Beef Festival at which part of the festivities is watching the trucks pull up and the live cattle get driven down the ramp and slaughtered right there on the World’s Largest Killing Floor or something - there’s no way” (Wallace 24?).
“Consider the Lobster,” by David Foster Wallace, published in the August 2004 edition of Gourmet Magazine explores the morality of the consumption of lobsters through the analysis of the Maine Lobster Festival. Foster Wallace guides his readers through his exploration of the festival and general circumstances of lobster eating before evoking a sense of obligation to the creature’s well being. His gentle slide into the ‘big picture’ through his causal argument wades readers into the depths of his thoughts through the power of storytelling until they are left with no choice but to engage with their own perception of the act with skepticism. Ultimately, the passage commands readers to reexamine their own consumption of lobsters regardless of
Fridman uses different strategies in order to convey his idea that people who are curious and serious about knowledge should not be labeled a nerd. To begin, Fridman starts his argument by stating how wrong it is that our society looks down upon intellectuals. Fridman conveys this idea when he explains that the people who want to learn are named “nerds” and “geeks” (1). Fridman also uses imagery to further expand the stereotype of being a geek by revealing that the actual meaning of a geek “is a street performer who shocks the public by biting off the heads of live chickens” (2). Fridman’s use of the words “shocks” and “biting off” show that a geek is clearly not a normal person, but rather someone bizarre (2).
Rhetorical Analysis Essay: Consider the Lobster The lobster is a disgustingly beautiful creature, known for its delicate taste, menacing shell and controversy. In his essay, “Consider the Lobster”, David Foster Wallace describes the events and festivities of the Maine Lobster Festival and the history of the lobster to deliver a poignant message about the moral implications of killing and eating animals. Wallace is able to develop his position and vividly capture the audience’s attention through a strong use of humor, deliberate tonal shifts and a unique structure. David Foster Wallace, and “Consider the Lobster” in particular, are known for their footnotes- and for good reason. The footnoted structure of the essay is very deliberate and very
has given rise to many popular misconceptions concerning mongooses and their ability to kill snakes” (Lodrick 192). Kipling produces these misinterpretations by forming unrealistic expectations for the reader through Rikki Tikki. Although Kipling grants Rikki’s character with the innate abilities of a mongoose, Kipling also dilinates Rikki-Tikki as an unequaled mongoose to appear almost immortal. It assists in creating a view of honor about Rikki-Tikki for the reader. As Rikki-Tikki is looking for Nagaina to put a halt to the conflict, he requests Darzee’s assistance and his response
Mary M. Nilan believes that the reason for lack of communication in society is because that the concept of love has demolished (128). Jerry in The Zoo Story says that " if we can so misunderstand, well then, why have we invented the word love in the first place?" (36). Jerry 's inability to communicate with the landlady 's dog and Peter, drove him to
The whale hunting in Denmark did shock the world. It is a traditional festival of Denmark to memorialize the old days of hunger. However, what caught the public attention is the inherently cruel hunting method the fishermen used. Powerboats are used to chase the whales. Knives and hooks are also involved.
In Jonathan wild, Fielding had a double object to carry on his lifelong war against humbug, and to show how poorly vice rewarded its votaries. Both these aims underlie Tom Jones but both are subdued to a wider aim to show life as it is. The provision which we have here made is human nature. The implication is that, if we can see the whole of human nature we shall find that some of it is in itself ugly, and some in itself beautiful. That which is ugly, makes people unhappy; that which is beautiful makes them happy.