In David Foster Wallace's article, Consider the Lobster, the author begins by explaining the festival he was attending, known as the Maine Lobster Festival. Wallace begins by explaining what the Maine Lobster Festival is all about, from the crowds that are drawn to exactly how the lobsters are treated. Also use this article to show and attract readers to the cruelty that lobsters endure for people's entertainment. Wallace's main point is to try to provoke readers about the morality of cooking and eating any animal. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay “We have no direct access to anything or anyone's pain but our own.” Wallace uses this quote in the article Consider the lobster who carries the tone throughout the article as aggressive and less than bothered by the topic of how animals, but especially lobsters, are treated. There are parts of the article that show the direct focus of aggression and annoyance, especially when it starts talking about the way they are handled and how people don't really see anything wrong with the way they are cooked, other than the ability to feel and have human reactions to being boiled. Wallace uses the aggressive tone, to get his point across when he states that it is wrong the way we humans treat animals for our pleasure and entertainment, not only does he have that tone throughout the article but you can also understand it the sense simply be annoyed everywhere. "From which you can choose your dinner while he watches you point..." Wallace not only seems to be annoyed by the way the animals are cooked but also by the way the festival is organized and the fact that people continue to participate without see a problem with it. Wallace also highlights the fact that this is part of a cultural divide, stating that lobster used to be seen as a lower class meal and now they are organizing an entire festival around the idea of ​​cooking and eating live lobsters for entertainment and entertainment. tourist attraction. When you start reading the article you're not sure what to expect or where it's going to go, every sentence seems to contradict the last or make no sense as to why it was put there. Wallace starts talking about the festival and what it does, along with how it attracts people to the area, his main point throughout the article always comes back to how the way lobsters are treated is wrong and inhumane. While Wallace stands by his argument that it is wrong to cook live lobsters, he also adds the fact that many people try to defend it by saying it doesn't matter because lobsters themselves cannot feel pain. “We have no direct access to anyone's or anything's pain but our own.” When Wallace uses this statement he is showing us that not everyone believes in the way things are handled because they don't believe they can feel pain, but Wallace uses pathos heavily in the middle of Consider the Lobster. He uses pathos when explaining what happens at the Maine Lobster Festival and compares it to how a Nebraska Beef Festival might be held, saying "where in the festivities are you watching trucks pull up and live cattle being driven down the ramp and slaughtered right there..." this is used as a way to downplay the likelihood of feeling bad about the livestock and the fact that that would never happen, which in the long run is no different than the way lobsters are managed, differently . By using pathos, Wallace is able to tug at the heartstrings of readers by referencing themtwo topics, many people don't mention eating a cow when they eat beef because of the attachment it gives to the meat. Except when referring to lobsters, they don't think anything different about it because, as Wallace says, "the point is that lobsters are basically giant sea insects," so many people feel no attachment to it and don't think twice about it. eating it, just because it's not a pet they don't really think there's anything wrong with eating it, but saying it was a pet would be a completely different topic and probably not as common as it is now. In the article Wallace goes on to argue the points about animals not feeling any pain, how animals are tortured for entertainment purposes and/or as gourmet meals for people, but I think Consider the Lobster was written to make you think really about the way we all treat animals. Wallace begins to explain the process that lobsters and the chefs who cook them go through. Not much thought goes into their preparation and everyone simply sees it as a gourmet dish or an out-of-the-ordinary main course. After reading and understanding Ma, in Consider the Lobster, Wallace makes several major points to support his claim that the morality behind cooking and eating lobster is wrong. He makes it very clear that cooking lobsters is an ethical issue. “The lobster, in other words, behaves just as you or I would behave if we were immersed in boiling water” using this statement gives readers a sense of guilt for comparing such a human reaction to an animal, and how the The thought of it would make anyone uncomfortable. “One detail so obvious that recipes don't even bother to mention is that the lobster should be alive when you put it in the kettle” when talking about cooking lobsters, Wallace shows that it's just part of the norm to do harm to lobster without thinking about the animal itself, this shows that our culture has made it normal to inflict pain on animals just to cook and enjoy them. Wallace also says that many cooks will have to leave the room because they don't want to listen to the process of cooking a live lobster. “Or the claws of the creature scraping the sides of the kettle as it squirms” this quote alone shows how annoyed Wallace is with the whole process of cooking lobsters, as everyone should be. If the way we cooked lobsters wasn't wrong, the cooks wouldn't have to leave the room. This doesn't always have to be just about lobsters, but can be used towards any animal, it is an inhumane way of treating animals. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Customize EssayMy last thought while reading this article came down to the simple fact that the way we treat animals is inhumane, David Wallace proved this through Consider the Lobster. After reading this, I believe that many people can see the bigger picture of something if they simply take the time and really understand the meaning. Reading this article really makes you relax and open your eyes to how we treat animals every day. Wallace used an interesting strategy, while reading the article you never know what you will read next considering Wallace was everywhere, bringing you to the sensitive topic of animal cruelty that you weren't expecting. This forced readers to read what else was going on behind the festival instead of seeing it as a cool thing for tourists to do, this made us stop and think about everything that was stated in the article. Consider the Lobster is 2004.