What goes through someone’s mind when they hear their stomach growl? If that same person chooses to eat lobster will they feel sorrow for the murder that occurred in order to prepare their meal? In “Consider the Lobster” by David Foster Wallace the central idea is that we as people need to refrain from cooking lobsters, because the act is inhumane. The short story in its entirety is focused on the mistreatment of the lobster during different events, which take place in our country. Wallace goes to talk about the Maine Lobster Festival, and how it is a tradition that should be disbanded. Following that he talks about how hundreds of years ago how lobsters were seen as cruel and unusual punishment, and would not even be served to criminals.  He then follows with providing information about how some chefs feel that the treatment of lobsters is harsh, because they cant even be in the room when they cook lobsters. Wallace is trying to state that we, the human race, are taking the lives of lobsters for granted by eating them, and buttering them up as if they are a delicacy. He is also trying to persuade the reader that this is inhumane as the lobster has a soul just like any person, and can feel pain. Wallace’s style of writing along with the use of the senses experienced by the lobsters to resonate with the reader proved to be an ineffective point for his story, as he swayed away from his central idea. 

We can see that Wallace tries to use a different writing style then just talking and telling how he feels about lobsters. Instead of telling his story followed with facts he tries to take a different approach by talking directly to the reader so that they can understand the quote on a more realistic scene. Wallace states, “The lobster, in other words, behaves very much as you or I would behave if we were plunged into boiling water. A blunter way to say this is that the lobster acts as if its in terrible pain, causing some cooks to leave the kitchen altogether and to take on of those little lightweight plastic oven timers with them into another room and wait until the whole process is over.” (62) As readers we are aware of the process of how lobsters come to become a delicious meal. Wallace wants us to be remorseful, and think about what exactly we are putting the lobster through. He carefully explains the pain that the lobster is going through to try and get into the readers weak point. He wants us to think about what is actually happening when we choose to drop the lobster into boiling water. Knowing that the lobster will no longer be a living creature but better yet an entrée that will be served with a creamy buttery glaze on top of it. The goal of Wallace is to continually use senses that humans can experience and show how the lobsters uses the same senses as a method to persuade the reader. Once a reader has a connection to a story it makes it easier to persuade them to choose a certain side of a controversial topic. However, this method of talking directly to the reader was ineffective because it drifted away from the central idea. 

How does imagery through sensual information affect the reader? “ Lobsters don’t have much in the way of eyesight or hearing, but they do have an exquisite tactile sense, one facilitated by hundreds of thousands of tiny hairs that produce through their carapace.” (63) Wallace is trying to convince the reader that we are similar to the lobsters in the fact that they have hundreds of thousands of hair over their body to help them detect approaching danger such as boiling water. What he wants the reader to think about is how when the lobster feels that he is in danger, and all the tiny hairs stick up on his body, that is the equivalent to goose bumps for people whenever we get nervous. Usually when someone gets goose bumps they are terrified or displeased with whatever is going on around them. When the reader feels that same feeling, and can identify what exactly the lobster is feeling it can make it easier to resonate with the lobster. This will then make the reader feel remorseful and stop eating lobsters, because they feel like they have a connection. However, he doesn’t talk about senses and elaborate on it enough which is why this technique of writing was ineffective for Wallace. 

What does a lobster have to do in order be compared to a humane? The only way a lobster can be in anyway compared to a humane if they can express all the five senses. Wallace states “However stuporous the lobster is from the trip home, for instance, it tends to come alarmingly to life when placed in boiling water” (62) Wallace indirectly tries to submit an innuendo that the lobster is able to use all its senses at once. The lobster can uses many of its sense when it “comes to life” as it is about to be dropped into the bowl of death. First it will hear the boiling water nearby, then it will see steam, followed by it feeling the temperature by its tiny hairs sticking up. Then as it is about to be dropped in the water it will try, and clench the pot before its life is about to end then finally it will taste the water as it is taking its last breathe of air. A reader can relate to this as you never really feel alive until you’re in a dangerous situation, or are doing something you shouldn’t be doing. In movies you can see the actor looks most alive when he is on the run from whoever is trying to hurt him. Here Wallace would’ve had the reader sold had he chose to focus on the imagery involved with the senses used in his story. With all this imagery it takes away from his main point yet again and creates a powerful argument but not the argument he wants. 

David Foster Wallace did makes interesting points to try and persuade the readers to change their opinion on the treatment of lobsters. However, his tactics were ineffective and poorly executed with not enough information to change the average carnivores mind. He didn’t execute his plan because he didn’t stay true to his story and solely focus on trying to convince the reader why any practice with lobsters is cruel and inhumane. Had he done this instead of using imagery to paint a picture in the reader’s head so we can resonate with what the lobster is feeling he would’ve been successful. There’s simply no way to change a person mind if the whole focus of the essay isn’t directly and clearly focused on one thing. All in all Wallace’s imagery contradicts his main point that readers should refrain from cooking lobster, because the practice is inhumane. 
