“Consider the Lobster” is a great piece to read going into our second paper considering that Wallace wrote his paper in the same fashion that we, as a class, intend to write ours. He starts with a community, then dives into research about how watching these lobsters be boiled to death is inhumane. He uses interviews and different sources throughout the process to prove his points, similar to our project. I found Wallace’s piece interesting because it shows that there is more beneath the surface of any topic. If I was going to the Maine Lobster Fest, one of the last things that would have been on my mind was how inhumane it the festival actually is. Any situation can relate to this because most of us only see what is presented to us and what the creators want us to see. Wallace on the other hand, points out to us and shows us how the joyful celebration can turn into a morbid outlook on the culture of the event. Although his piece was very informative, I felt it was slightly biased. Wallace seemed to talk down about the people at the festival as if he was in a significantly higher class then them. He also fails to talk about how with everything we eat, we cause harm. By eating chickens, cows, and even vegetables, we do harm to the Earth. So just because we do not see them being harmed it is ok and doesn’t deserve the same recognition? I feel that Wallace proved a great point and had a very informative, interesting article but should be less biased in his work.
Comments