An Analysis on Consider the Lobster by David Foster Wallace

The author mentions the Maine Lobster Festival which, as the name suggests, consists of collection and cooking of lobsters with a variety of competitions, an event that attracted over 100,000 people from across the country. In all these, Wallace questions one thing, "Is it right to boil a sentient creature alive just for our gustatory pleasure?" (Wallace). Wallace poses this question to engage his audience in thinking about the matter and drawing their own conclusions rather than answering the question by himself. A critical analysis of the essay shows how Wallace uses has put forth his ideas in order to help the readers draw their own conclusion whether it is ethical to boil live lobsters. This paper analyses the essay to answer the question "How does Wallace show that a two-sided debate has more than two sides?" First, Wallace uses footnotes in his essay, serving to encourage the reader to interact with the text and participate in his arguments.

In addressing the question, he poses different questions in connection with the previous question. First he asks whether these lobsters indeed feel any pain as some activists from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals group attended the MLF and expressed their concerns about the lobsters feeling pain with such treatment as boiling them alive. Some researchers believe as the lobsters lack a complex nervous system, including the cerebral cortex that is responsible for suffering and pain, as do the humans, they do not feel any pain even when subjected to the same pressures that would cause pain to the humans. However, Wallace argues that these animals indeed feel pain and that even though they lack a complex nervous system, they have nociceptors and prostaglandins that are controlled by the brain stem and thalamus (Heffernan, pp.

In addition, he argues that even though the animals could feel the pain, it would be difficult for humans to know that they do as they cannot communicate with humans, particularly the invertebrates. Wallace goes ahead to question why those who buy the lobsters tend to feel less uncomfortable or careful that these animals are suffering or feeling pain. In his view, animals are less important when compared to humans and thus humans do not tend to think so much about the suffering these animals undergo through the methods of cooking plus eating them (Wallace). In his conclusion, Wallace poses a number of questions as to whether or not it is unethical to eat and enjoy meat from animals without considering the pain they undergo while preparing them.