Journal 1 — David Forster Wallace’s Consider the Lobster


  1. If I could invite David Foster Wallace into the classroom and discuss his essay Consider the Lobster with him, I’d have a few questions regarding his feelings towards lobsters in general. Initially, I would like to know his stance on lobster in the first place. Does he enjoy eating lobster? How often does he consume lobster either at a restaurant or at home? I’d ask this question to see whether he has a bias towards or against lobster preparation and cooking—thus guiding his tone throughout the essay in totality. I would also ask him what his definite stance is on whether he believes lobsters feel pain when being boiled, and if he would cook a lobster himself? Throughout his essay, he uses scientific evidence to back up whether lobsters feel pain or not and juxtaposes lobster anatomy with other organisms such as humans, rats, etc.
  2. I do not personally believe in any limits to a written discussion. What I interpret from the question posed, ‘limits’— being morality and whether a topic is sensitive or not. With this being said, I believe there are no limits to what can be discussed in writing as there are many ways to engage an audience through specific topics. I’d anticipate my audience’s questions to be based on what was written or even topics out of the scope of what was written due to the snowball effect of digressive discussion. The questions can be based on the opinion of what was written, feelings, and reactions. Further insight questions and supportive criticism as well.