Journal 16—Reconsider the Lobster
My thought process and ideology behind David Foster Wallace’s Consider the Lobster from reading it a few months ago to now have remained mostly unchanged. Although, due to having read many different articles since then, I can see more clearly as to what DFW is trying to get at. He does mention the whole culture around the Maine Lobster Festival to be a peculiar situation in which Mainer’s and other festival-goers maul on freshly boiled lobster like there is no end. On the flipside to that, many lobster chefs and other general steamers have a hard time placing a live lobster within the pot for consumptive enjoyment. People do it, though. There’s a weird paradox in this that I capture after having read the last two articles of recent. People will cook these lobsters, but they’ll also advocate for animal rights and be a firm believer in animals and their safety. Some may not even consider that a lobster can be an animal within their own right.
Reflecting to the last essay we read, the author had an example where someone cannot consider a fish to be an animal, because they just don’t seem like animals to her. But, what if I consider fish to be animals? The murky and unreachable idea that I will always have a hard time gaining traction on is the gray area between people and what they consider animals to be. I think all living organisms earn the right to be called “animal.” However, some have preferences; a fish not being an animal. There needs to be a more set guideline and definition for this word, because in the end, people are confusing definition with ethical morals.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
