Rhetorical Analysis Of Consider A Lobster

“Everyone knows what a lobster is. As usual though there’s much more to know than most of us care about – it’s all a matter of what your interests are” (Wallace 460). Novelist and essayist David Foster Wallace was the Roy E. Disney Professor of Creative Writing at Pomona College until he died in 2008. Wallace is best known for writing dazzling journalistic pieces, short stories and novels. 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. In my perception, Wallace uses the two strategies of ethos and logos to make his argument that killing animals alive such as lobster is wrong and unethical strong and appealing to his audience. He uses the strategy of ethos to give the readers a sense of morality when thinking about the life of a lobster and uses the strategy of pathos to present logical facts and research for his argument.