Jean Messeroux
Summary
In Consider the Lobster, David Wallace introduces the Maine Lobster Festival, where lobsters
are captured and cooked alive before an anxious audience. He discusses the moral and ethical
issues behind this event, depicting lobsters as innocent creatures that are being mocked and
tortured. Before reading this, I was unaware of the cruelty that takes place in a lobster’s
preparation to be cooked. Wallace even goes on to challenge readers into placing themselves in
the lobsters’ helpless condition. Without directly bashing the tradition of eating lobster, Wallace
inspires readers to meditate on the morality of preparing such a delicacy.
Evaluation of “Consider the Lobster”
David Wallace’s essay is made most effective by his choices of structure and vivid description.
As he outlines the process of preparing lobster, he depicts them in a way that influences the
consciences of his readers. This is effective in that it forces readers to develop sympathy for the
lobsters. Wallace’s essay is also designed in lengthier paragraphs with large footnotes at the
bottom which help to emphasize his descriptions. Although the footnotes give credibility to his
work, they weaken its overall effectiveness and appeal.
5 Questions:
1. To what extent do the footnotes in the essay strengthen Wallace’s argument?
A) “Of course the most common sort of counterargument here would begin by objecting
that ‘like best’ is really just a metaphor…although its modern support comes mostly
from behaviorist psychology.” (312)
B) “Is it significant that ‘lobster,’ ‘fish,’ and ‘chicken’ are our culture’s words for both
the animal and the meat, whereas most mammals…sinks the whole theory, or are
there special, biblico-historical reasons for that equivalence?)”(309)
C) “It turned out that one Mr. William R. Rivas-Rivas, a high-ranking PETA official out
of the group’s Virginia headquarters, was indeed there this year, albeit
solo…brandishing a plastic sword at people, etc.; plus it rained)).” (307)
2. What is the significance of the rhetorical questions posed in the second to last paragraph?
A) “Do you ever think much about the (possible) moral status and (probable) suffering of the
animals involved?” (314)
B) “If you do, what ethical convictions have you worked out that permit you not just to eat but to
savor and enjoy flesh-based viands (since of course refined enjoyment, rather than mere
ingestion, is the whole point of gastronomy)? (314)
C) “If, on the other hand, you’ll have no truck with confusions or convictions…what makes it
feel truly okay, inside, to just dismiss the whole thing out of hand?” (314)
3. Where does Wallace position himself in the morality of eating lobster?
A)”I’m also concerned not to come off as shrill or preachy when what I really am is more like
confused.” (314)
B) “…and when it comes to defending such a belief, even to myself, I have to acknowledge that
(a) I have an obvious selfish interest in this belief, since I like to eat certain kinds of animals and
want to be able to keep doing it, and (b) I haven’t succeeded in working out any sort of personal
ethical system in which the belief is truly defensible instead of just selfishly convenient.” (313314)
C) “Do you ever think, even idly, about the possible reasons for your reluctance to think about
it? I am not trying to bait anyone here – I’m genuinely curious. After all, isn’t being extra aware
and attentive and thoughtful about one’s food and its overall context part of what distinguishes a
real gourmet?” (314)
4. What effect is caused by Wallace’s use of sarcasm?
A) “Does that comparison seem a bit much? If so, exactly why? Or what about this one :
Is it possible that future generations will regard our present agribusiness and eating
practices in much the same way we now view Nero’s entertainments or Mengele’s
experiments?” (313)
B) “To my lay mind, the lobster’s behavior in the kettle appears to be the expression of
a preference; and it may well be that an ability to form preferences is the decisive
criterion for real suffering.” (312)
C) “Perhaps lobsters are more like those frontal-lobotomy patients one reads about who
report experiencing pain in a totally different way than you and I.” (312)
5. How does Wallace’s characterization of the suffering felt by lobster appeal to his readers?
A) “The truth is, that if you, the festival attendee, permit yourself to think that lobsters
can suffer and would rather not, the MLF begins to take on the aspect of something
like a Roman circus or medieval torture-fest.” (313)
B) “A blunter way to say this is that the lobster acts if it’s in terrible pain, causing some
cooks to leave the kitchen altogether and to take one of those little lightweight plastic
oven-timers with them into another room and wait until the whole process is over.”
(310)
C) “Most of us have been in supermarkets or restaurants that feature tanks of live
lobsters, from which you can pick out your supper while it watches you point.” (306)