Eating Lobster Discussion Questions

1. How does Wallace feel about eating lobsters? Does it shift through the essay?

In his essay, Wallace does not take a clear stance on whether he does or doesn’t support eating lobsters. But from context clues, I believe that he does or has partaken in eating lobster because he says that he believes that “animals are less morally important than human beings” (470). And on the same page, he states that “I like to eat certain kinds of animals and want to be able to keep doing it”. Another context clue that has led me to conclude this is he states on page 466 “It is, at any rate, uncomfortable for me, and just about everyone…. My own main way of dealing with this conflict has been to avoid thinking about the whole unpleasant thing.” (Wallace). He’s saying

that his way of dealing with the topic of “animal-cruelty-and-eating issue” is ignoring it. I would not say that I saw a shift of his position throughout the essay because he did not make his feelings clear.
2. Wallace asks, “Is it all right to boil a sentient creature alive just for our gustatory pleasure?”
I think that it is “all right” to boil a sentient creature alive but I do not believe we do it just for our gustatory pleasure. I think of it like the food chain, some animals have to get eaten just so that other animals are able to survive. It is the same with humans, we eat/boil these “sentient creatures” so that we have a source of food to stay alive and it is a part of the ongoing life cycle of survival. We all cannot survive on a vegetarian diet, but I do believe that our intake could be less or that we could opt out of killing some creatures for our source of food because we do consume half the sea, eventually there will be nothing left. For example, just alone at the Maine Lobster Festival “over 25,000 pounds of lobster is consumed” (Wallace, 459). Not counting all the lobsters that are caught for restaurant purposes, lobsters caught for resale purposes, and other events. That is a lot, it is unnecessary, and there should be a limit. I cannot even believe that there is that much lobster in the world to cater to these preferences. Although I do believe that animals/creators do feel the effects of us preparing them to be consumed. I don’t think it is inhumane or that they are suffering. I do agree with Wallace’s point where he states that lobsters might be like those “frontal-lobotomy patients one reads about…the point being that the pain is not distressing to them or something they want to get away from.” (469)
3. What does Wallace mean by preference? What role does it play in his overall argument?
What Wallace means by preference is that we have our likings or interests.

It plays a big role in his argument because he his arguing about a person’s preference to eat lobster(s). He also uses preference in a few different ways throughout his argument. First, when he is discussing the ways to prepare a lobster he talks about the different “preferences” that people have. He states how some chefs cut the lobster in half before boiling it, others microwave it, and the obvious one boiling. These are all preferences based on the person doing the cooking. Secondly, on page 469, when talking about the lobsters he brings up a theory that the lobsters have preference(s). In this case, he is using preference to mean instinct. Their preference can lead them to “detect changes in water temperature.” Another way he talks about lobsters having a preference is when they are in the ocean “lobsters will always congregate in whatever part is darkest” (Wallace, 470). They also have a fondness for space “they clearly dislike the crowding that’s part of their captivity in tanks”. Which is a reason why “lobsters’ claws are banded [when captured] is to keep them from attacking one another under the stress of close-quarter

storage.”
Exploring Context

1. How does Wallace’s essay change your reaction to this video? In what ways does the video address Wallace’s points about lobsters?
Wallace’s essay did not change my reaction to this video or my believe that it is “all right” to boil “sentient creatures”. In Wallace’s essay, his main point is how the lobsters are suffering and that they show struggle when being boiled. Wallace also states that “when a lobster is fully immersed…. you can usually hear the cover rattling and clanking as the lobster tries to push it off” (467). But in the video “How to Boil a Live Maine Lobster” I did not hear any of the lobsters “frantically clanking” on the lid. However, I could not see if they were hanging on to the edge of the pot like Wallace claims because their claws were tied. I don’t think this video supports or adds to Wallace’s points because you can’t see clear struggling like he states in his entire essay. A video showing the lobsters frantically clanking, trying to push off the lid, and showing the lobsters struggling would support his essay and might make people feel different about supporting the boiling/killing of creatures.