“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 …show more content…
On page 60, footnote 8 compares the pegging/banding of lobsters’ claws to the debeaking of broiler chickens, the cropping of swines’ tails, and the dehorning of cattle. Recognizing that the reader will likely fail to see the impact of the banding, Foster Wallace provides the comparison of other similar practices that will likely be more promptly deemed unacceptable. Under footnote 14, Foster Wallace extends the comparison, driving the reader to understand the distinction made between the consumption of mammals and non-mammals that is notable in speech. When describing mammals as food, we use separate words to distinguish them as creatures and dishes, such as “cow” and “beef,” and “pig” and “pork.” However, non-mammals share the same names in the wild and on menus, such as “shrimp,” “salmon,” and “lobster.” Calling the reader out on this linguistic practice develops a sense of self awareness. Though hidden in the footnote, to avoid creating a tangent in the overall argument and worse falling to the counterargument that “it's just semantics,” Foster Wallace throws these pieces in as curveballs- evidence that a reader was unlikely to expect nor be prepared to process. While intentionally he intentionally trespasses’ the readers comfort zone of their own communication, he makes his article relate, if only through these footnotes, to the ways in which they’ve previously engaged with the matter. As Foster Wallace situates the reader in the moral conundrum, he draws from the them a greater awareness of self and skepticism of the multiple party’s motivations which contributes to the overall multidimensional analysis of the
Thread 1: In The Omnivore’s Dilemma, Pollan describes what the omnivore’s dilemma actually is. He begins his book as a naturalist in a supermarket trying to decide “what to eat?”. This question is harder to answer without asking where the food originates. Knowing where food comes from is very difficult, unless it is locally grown or clearly states it on the package. Processed food is more complicated to understand where it comes from.
The article “Consider the Lobster” by David Wallace was first published in August 2004 and it has led to a lot of public controversies based on the morality and ethicality, surrounding the massive cooking of the lobster. There have been a lot of debates also from the vegetarians and the animal rights activists concerning the great lobster festival held at the Penobscot festival every late July. One thing we ought to understand is that the lobster is a summer food, and most people would want to have it freshly caught from the sea. In addition, it is a festival that is performed once a year, and therefore it gives them some time to reproduce. However, the central issue raised concerning this festival is based on the fact that some people feel that the festival is completely against the animal rights, and especially inflicts pain to the lobsters.
In other countries people do not hesitate to eat a dog or a horse however we do not eat those here because we have emotional connections to these animals. In India, for example, they eat their dogs but would never even dream of eating their cows; we are the exact opposite. Foer poses the question: if our neighbors do not own pets, would we even be able to be offended if they ate a dog for dinner? It really makes you think. Next, he asks us, why do we stray away from eating a severely impaired human, but not a pig with potentially more brain capacity than said human?
We are all familiar with the notion of “pleasure.” Simple pleasures are ever-present in our lives but complex, extended pleasures are fulfilling yet fleeting. They bring about intense experiences to gratify our desires, although they are not a necessity, in the same way slaughtering and plating an overhunted species is not absolutely imperative. However, despite my own belief that an endangered species is not to be poached upon, I commend Liz Alderman for completing “Chefs Fight for Songbird” in a way in which she successfully set key points from both sides of the arguments while also discreetly and strategically establishing and backing her own position in the feud. For those completely unfamiliar with the topic, Alderman might be able to
Jonathan Safran Foer’s Eating Animals is a book about persuasion. Foer seeks to convince his readers to take any step in reducing what he believes is the injustice of harming animals. To achieve this, Foer employs many persuasion techniques and often changes his approach when he targets specific groups. His strategies include establishing himself as an ethical authority and appealing to his readers’ emotions, morals, and reason.
In Jonathan Foer’s argumentative essay “Let Them Eat Dog”, he makes a very convincing argument for the consumption of dog, a surprising topic to argue for. However, when one reads through his excerpt, it’s quite difficult to escape the sound logic he utilizes throughout the piece. Ranging from commentary on the taste of dog meat to points about the ecological impact it would have if the U.S. started eating dog, Foer is persuasive and reasonable. So reasonable, in fact, that it begs the reader to question exactly why he would put so much effort into arguing for eating dog, something that most people won’t change their minds on no matter how logical the argument is. Foer even admits at the end of his essay that despite his best efforts, people
(Wallace 55). Wallace informs the reader of the history of lobsters and again puts a vivid illustration in the readers head, leaving the reader contemplating if they truly want to eat a lobster and the morality of eating
The beginning of the essay, the tone and diction are both lighthearted and inconsequential- full of basic observations and details. As the argument progresses, the tone shifts to be much more serious, even the footnotes hold a more serious perspective and address more insightful issues. Even in the moments of sincerity, Wallace builds a place of non-threatening engagement, reassuring the audience that he is not an expert either and any decisions about the consumption of meat is an individual one. Such is evident in Footnote 14; Wallace explores the linguistic trends in naming food, then immediately identifies himself as a non-expert by restating that is is just a theory and asking about “biblio-historic reasons” that could unravel his whole
It said that a lobster’s nervous system is quite simple and it is ill-equipped to feel pain; however, Wallace explains that the claim is “incorrect in about nine different ways”(pg60). He convinces the reader by first of all displaying the information in an easy to read and unbiased way. Wallace then explains the anatomy of a lobster and shows the reader that lobsters have a centralized nervous system. Then, he uses a mixture of logical and pathetic appeal to demonstrate that lobster’s can sense the scorching hot water, by saying “Lobsters have pain receptors sensitive to potentially damaging extremes of temperature,”(pg63). While saying that, he reports the “struggling, thrashing, and lid-clattering” which occurs when the lobsters’ are in a boiling kettle, Wallace asserts that due to the lobsters’ behavior and neurological build-up show that a lobster can perceive pain, by saying that a lobster’s action show a preference to not get boiled alive, and this preference leads to the lobster suffering.
As diets and health become more and more of a public concern in America. Two authors weigh in on their opinions on how the American public should handle the problem of obesity as well as their solutions to the overwhelming issue. In one article, “Against Meat,” published on the New York Times website in 2009, points out that the solution to obesity should be vegetarianism. Johnathan Foer who is a vegetarian, claims that his diet and way of living is his the way of improving health in the American public. Foer’s article provides a sense of humor as well as personal stories to attempt to persuade his audience for the ethical treatment of animals along with his personal solution for his own health and the health of his family.
Ambar Delacruz Essay 1: The Omnivore’s Dilemma. Michael Pollan’s The Omnivore’s Dilemma addresses a variety of concerns about food production and consumption. One might ask what exactly is the omnivore’s dilemma? And the basic answer to this question is “what should we eat for dinner”?
The consumption of animal meat is highly accepted in today’s society, however, the methods, in which the animals are killed are sometimes questioned for their cruelty. David Wallace, in considering the Lobster, takes the readers to the Maine Lobster Festival, where the consumption of lobsters is exploited, and the festival's attendees celebrate these acts. However, the essay goes furthermore than narrating the lobster’s festival, because through sensory details, and different techniques, he makes the readers question society’s morality. By stressing the cruelty it takes boiling lobsters alive, Wallace is capable of creating a sense of awareness in society decisions that demonstrate their corrupted morality, and how it affects directly others (like lobsters)
The no-space trip: a mirror to our world Literature serves as a mirror to our world, when looking into it closely, it reflects even the most banal aspects of ourselves and the society we live in. Kurt Vonnegut 's Slaughterhouse Five serves as a mean of social criticism. For instance, the creation of Kilgore Trout and the different plots of his books criticize several aspects of society by the use of science fiction such as faith, economy and oil dependency. In chapter nine, Billy Pilgrim stops at a store which has several Trout books. As he reads them, the narrator introduces the resumed plot of each one.
However, his true morals are revealed when the narrator shows signs of guilt like “My head ached, and I fancied a ringing in my ears.” The narrator’s transition from superiority to guilt represents the reality that the acknowledgement of wrongdoings can either be done consciously or unconsciously, and that the latter has considerable negative
Despite all of the water pressure they’re under, lobsters still find time to dance! If you were to put on scuba gear and travel down through the miles of water to the ocean floor, what would you find? Well, apart from sand and other fish, you’d find lobsters moving forwards and backwards, performing their swaying lobster dance. This motion helps lobsters move through the water and quickly escape their predators. If they’re skilled enough dancers and can protect themselves from every threat, it’s believed that these creatures, who are part of the marine crustacean family, can live up to 100 years!