Consider The Lobster By David Wallace Summary

Wallace effectively led both readers on and made them think that he was bias to one side before he stated facts going each what each group believed. He managed to stay in the middle of the debate and made the readers think about why the opposite group believes what they believe. His essay is subversive by putting possible doubt in the readers mind and made them actually listen to other viewpoints. When I say “other viewpoints” I am speaking about the viewpoints of people who think it is unethical to boil lobsters alive or even people who think it is completely fine to boil lobsters. Wallace accomplished this by showing no issue with the way lobsters have been cooked before he asked the question “Is it ok to boil a lobster for are pleasure”. So essentially Wallace led the reader on by feeding them the information they wanted to hear. Wallace switched opinions and brought up all the tendencies and facts that lobsters do while they are in the process of being boiled. He disarms the reader by agreeing with them and then when he changes his opinion the reader cannot go into defense mode because Wallace has already stated what they would of said in defense. …show more content…
He accomplished this by stating facts that pleased both groups of readers. Wallace did this to lower their guard so when he started stating facts that went against what they believed they would have a better understanding of what they disagree with. In “Consider the Lobster” Wallace talks about how to get the best taste out of the lobster which is to boil the lobster. “Boiling is a very easy method to cook a lobster” (Wallace 3) if you are a family that enjoys eating lobster in your home. It does not take long boil a lobster and it is the freshest way to eat your lobster. This is where the debate arises of if it is humane or inhumane to boil a lobster