David Foster Wallace provides a controversial argument in his article, “Consider the Lobster,” by forcing his readers to not only think about how good their dinner may taste, but also how it got on their plate. He challenges the ethical standard which Americans use to reason with the idea that it is completely humane to put aside their morals when dealing with their taste buds, specifically when eating lobster. By using rhetorical devices ranging from the way he constructed his paper, to playing with different diction and focusing on emotional appeal throughout his essay, Wallace argues from both sides of the spectrum, (i.e., PETA member to Maine Lobster Fest fanatic), in order to assist his audience in considering
The Maine Lobster Festival is supposed to be a celebration inviting anyone and everyone to celebrate the delectable lobster, but Wallace uses it to shed some light on the welfare of the animal when cooking and eating it. He does a great job at analyzing the festival as well as challenging the meaning of food based on how we define the animals we consume. This includes the substitution of words, people’s ignorance, and the scientific language. The way we identify food can all be supported by these three main influences.
This analogy depicts two young fish swimming along a stream that then cross paths with an old fish that asks them how was the water today. The young fish then reply with asking, “what the hell is water”; this is in direct correlation with Wallace’s audience. Wallace is explaining that the youth of today is ignorant to the day to day realties that are experienced by the older, more seasoned population. Rationally with age comes the experienced knowledge about the ins and outs of life that those new to the water cannot comprehend as of yet. This concept resonates during the speech through Wallace’s expression that life is filled with difficulties, hardships, and boredom but is ultimately subjective to its perception. The logic continues with his explanation of one’s natural default setting being the utter downfall of their existence. This sound reasoning lures in the audience because everyone is aware that with age comes experience and therefore a better understanding of life. The natural default setting puts them in complete belief that they are the center of the universe and all of life occurrences revolve around their existence. With this setting burned into their thoughts, it hinders them because they worship themselves, which leads to their unhappiness. As Wallace said, “worship one’s own beauty and they will die a million deaths while aging” “worship one’s intelligence and
Wallace’s notion, in other words, suggests what he believes to be the true value of a post-secondary, liberal arts education. That it consciously guides us in choosing how and what to perceive in certain situations, in turn allowing us a choice in how we interpret such experiences in day-to-day, adult life. The alternative to this conscious state of mind is the unconscious or “default” settings of human psychology, in where our narcissistic and arrogant emotions control how we view things. Wallace states that although these feelings are natural, expressing them day-in and day-out as reaction to the trenches of daily adult life can make us “slaves” to...
How does one compare a writing from the civil rights movement to an article from Gourmet magazine? Martin Luther King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” and David Foster Wallace’s “Consider the Lobster” address strikingly different moral topics. King is arguing the importance of the civil rights movement, while Wallace is discussing the ethics of eating lobster. Some may say that King’s letter is more effective because his personal investment in the cause persuades the audience, whereas others may claim that Wallace’s review is more effective because his disconnection from the topic forces the reader to think for themselves. However, King and Wallace have different motives in their essays, and each utilize unique writing styles that support their
The senators knew few biologists that would kill a monster even if the monster was a man killer. The senators knew even fewer biologists that would do it without objections from a scientific conscience. The southern senators knew Mart Hollings’ sense of adventure and lack of boundaries would be embraced by the romantic minds of their constituency. It was apparent that cowboys had not all died off. So Mart Hollings was given the job and the funding that came with it. The senators told the press they made their decision based on Mart Hollings’ education, past work, and that they’ve never met anybody more American. So Mart Hollings became a figure more than a man, a Chuck Yeager flying down the ocean below.
During a commencement ceremony, David Foster Wallace addresses graduating students with a query of how to think critically, away from their default parameters of thought. The challenge laid by Wallace was to begin learning how to break away from an egocentric method of thought--away from being able to narrowly look at a situation and observe how it may have a personal effect, in preference for a train of thought that looks at “why is this happening and how does it affect everyone involved”? This is supported by multiple analogies that Wallace covers, such as trying to comprehend why someone is driving defensively in an SUV, or why someone is driving recklessly and in a hurry. Wallace goes as far as to reverse the egocentric train of thought
For my project, I chose to reconstruct my rhetorical analysis essay in the form of a commercial or public service announcement posted to YouTube. My rhetorical analysis essay analyzed David Foster Wallace’s “Consider the Lobster” which concerned the morality of cooking and utilizing lobsters for food. Because of this, I decided to turn my analysis into a video advocating for an end to the slaughter and consumption of lobsters. Video is a common form of media for this type of advocacy, since it is easily accessible to people and doesn’t require the audience to put much effort into consuming the information. I chose to upload this video to YouTube since it is one of the most common places on the internet to share videos and has a large user base. Posting the video
"The Killer Instinct" is an article published in “A Monthly Journal of Religion & Public Life by Institute on Religion & Public Life" in January 2000. This journal, which started from 1998, contains various articles with opinions, arguments, debates and commentary on religious and moral questions, and social issues going in American society. Sally Thomas, a poet and a writer, argues in the article that it's the nature of boys who constructs them rough and not the toys that create them violent. She argues with various examples from her friends and even from her own experience throughout the article making clear sense of support to her argument. This article by Sally Thomas is a successful argument appealing toward its audience with a clear and strong use of reasoning, emotion and authority.