Analysis Of The Book ‘ Consider The Lobster ‘ By David Foster Wallace

Published: 2021-06-29 02:08:36
essay essay

Category: Book

Type of paper: Essay

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Hey! We can write a custom essay for you.

All possible types of assignments. Written by academics

For centuries, meat is one of the major and popular food consumed by the human being. Apart from eating the meat, we rarely take the time to consider about the process involved to ensure that the meat reaches our table. “Consider the Lobster” by David Foster Wallace makes readers think of the little-known topic of animals rights, which is clearly explained to bring the whole picture concerning the violation of animal rights. In this essay, a general picture is explored by the ways in which the creatures have to undergo the violation of humans before they end up in the mouths of the consumers. Surely, the animals used for food also have rights, so they should be treated in a more ethical manner.
With “Consider the Lobster”, Wallace carries an educative story, which helps readers understand the experiencing process of the lobsters and appreciate the issues that he raises regarding the immoral acts done on the lobsters before are finally consumed. Wallace shows his compassion for lobsters’ pain when they are caught and boiled in the water. He writes, “ the truth is that if you, the festival attendee, permit yourself to think that lobsters can suffer and would rather not, the MLF begins to take on the aspect of something like a Roman circus or medieval torture-fest” (Wallace 553). He compares Maine Lobster Festival as well as serving lobster to the types of ancient games where the competitors had to suffer pain and sorrows to entertain the crowd. Nowadays, in order to satisfy the demands of consumers, people are treating animals cruelly with their catching and cooking methods. I agree with Wallace that lobster’s feelings are not much different to ours, they also feel hurt and struggle to be alive.
Therefore human nature can not allow people to use inhuman actions to deal with them. For me, although the essay focuses on the lobster, it acts as an insight towards thinking about all other animals we eat as food. It awakens our empathy with the pain that the creatures have to undergo by the cruel act of humans when they are cooked. People are challenged to take time and think more about the food that they are consuming and change their notions on how animal meat should be prepared.
There is a fact that animals are suffering the pain by the violation of humans. Before turning into our food, the animals go to the slaughterhouses where their lives will be ended. For instance, Doris Lin – an animal rights expert describes: “live, conscious chickens are hung upside down from hooks and dipped into an electrified water bath to stun them before their throats and cut” (Lin). Beause of the industrialization, making meat seems to be easier and faster than ever. Lin gives information about a production line, which can kill an array of chickens industrially by what is called the electric immobilization slaughter method. Apparently, nothing is crueller than terminating a life when it is still alive, still moving, still feeling even though it is not a human. The killing of animals is an evidence of the evil action of people to animals.
Due to the requirements of the low cost but the high quality, animals are put into the horrible situations. In “Human Use of Animals”, Orlans and Dresser write, “all part of a society has deemed veal crates to be cruel and unacceptable, and yet they are supporting the trade in the full knowledge of what happens to those animals.” (Orlans and Dresser 251). The authors emphasize that all people who involve in the veal trade like farmers, businessman, and consumers… might fully recognize this unethical matter, but because of profit and other demands, they are contributing to the evil actions. Sometimes, they ask others to prevent the animal violation, yet their actions could be opposite to their words. So people are advised to consider their responses that get along with their talks. With this fact, they should think more about what they are doing with animals. I believe that every person in society has responsibility and should cooperate together in eliminating the violation of animals.
Alan Carter also has an empathy with animal pain. Although he does not encourage people to be a vegetarian, he believes that animals still feel painful as humans. He notes, “we have reason to hold that in causing nonhuman animals to squeal and writhe, we are running a significant risk, unlike in the possible case of stepping on fairies, of inflicting needless pain. And that is immoral” (Carter 21). For him, despite no determinable evidence to prove that animals feel painful, such details are enough for us to admit that they actually have the consciousness to react with pain as human. Clearly, people are free to continue enjoying meat, but they should rethink about the whole process of handling the animals all the way from birth until turning into food since humans have violated their rights for a long time. As the human, people are convinced to act more morally to animals.
Although, in “The Animals Rights Debate”, Garner accepts animals have sentience to be aware of the pain like humans, he supposes that the human benefits should be prioritized. Accoding to him, most of the animals can not understand the meaning of “staying alive”. Because they do not feel any living advantages and pleasures; therefore life or death, for animals, is not distinct. In contrast, as human beings, people can realize the value of their lives, they respect and fight for their survivals. For this reason, animals are considered as one of the many resources all over the world that man has right to breed and is obviously free to use in any way that seems fit. The situation continues to make any effort to fight for the animal rights hard. However, I would question conversely to Garner’s opinion. If animals do not know what is “staying alive”, so why they have to writhe and scream when people hurt them, why the birds have to find warm places to avoid the winter, why the geckos have to change their skin color when they meet strangers, etc… It is caused of survivals. For me, reflections of animal and human are very similar, so people should put animal rights on a higher level. But this issue continues to remain as the debate in the public that will take some time before the world or everyone understands the even animals have rights.
Many people would agree that the world is better if we treat each other with love and morality. According to the issues discussed above, the topic concerning animal rights remains as a debatable topic. But people should look back what they did and what was sacrificing for their satisfaction, and consider to change their perception on how animal meat could be prepared with the minimal immoral methods. Ultimately the human notion about animals changes due to changes in legislation laws, beliefs, cultural practices among many other factors; so people from different cultures have different forms of using, handling and killing animals for meat. Despite the differences, the fact remains that animals rights are violated in one way or the other by the human beings, so people need to adjust their awareness of the animal rights and treat animals more ethically.

Warning! This essay is not original. Get 100% unique essay within 45 seconds!


We can write your paper just for 11.99$

i want to copy...

This essay has been submitted by a student and contain not unique content

People also read