Consider the Lobster
Analysis
David
Foster Wallace in his essay Consider the Lobster writes an intriguing essay
(from a rhetorical standpoint) about a lobster festival that develops into something
much more. The essay begins with just the lobster festival and a description of
it, but Wallace expertly transitions the essay to become something of a moral
battleground causing many of us what is called in psychology cognitive dissonance
(the discomfort that you feel when two opposing opinions come into contact with
each other in your mind). It is really impressive the way in which he does
this. He uses this festival as an opportunity to write about the morality of
cooking lobster while it is still alive. It is interesting how he uses the
festival as a starting point to move into his opinions lobsters. He first
starts with festival and then moves into the subject of lobsters, many facts
and statistics are pulled out so that by the end of the essay you feel as
though you could write this 350 page paper solely on the facts that he states,
but this seems to be essential to the paper because the reader then feels that
they know lobsters better than just that really expensive food that you get
every once in a while. The lobster then
becomes more of a living thing to the reader. After what seems like a possibly infinite
amount of lobster facts Wallace brings the focus back to the festival and starts
talking about the organization PETA, who is apparently at the lobster festival
most years to explain the pain that lobsters may or may not experience while
being boiled. From here Wallace gets into the lobster meat of things1
he turns the reader’s attention to what he really wanted to go to all along,
the lobster cooking morality. He leaves the reader in a grey ambiguous area
where you’re left not quite sure what you believe anymore because the whole
world seems to have been turned upside down by lobsters. Wallace makes the
reader think about their view on the subject and probably even managed to
change a few opinions on the matter.
1: I know it was bad, but after seeing Wallace do it so many
times I thought that I’d give footnotes a shot and for some reason it was the
only thing I could think of that seemed worthy of one. I apologize for any pain
that the pun may have caused.
No comments:
Post a Comment