Gourmet magazine originally planned for David Foster Wallace to write an innocuous review of the annual Maine Lobster Festival (MLF). As the essay continues, the reader notices the shift from a review of the festival to a topic on the ethics of food consumption, particularly that of lobster. The rhetorical goal of this essay is not to convince foodies to abandon their current eating habits, but to tell them that they need to think about the culture and ethics of food consumption and the fact that people have generally little sympathy for what they eat. Wallace is able to create a stimulating debate, while remaining relatively neutral, through his use of diction, irony, imagery and persuasive appeals, with an authentic and informative tone throughout the essay . Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay The diction used by Wallace begins with a rather simplistic choice of words. References to lobsters are often negative, calling them "eaters of dead things" and "food to munch on." The purpose of this choice of words is to initially give readers little or no opinion about lobsters. Over time, Wallace's diction evolves to become more sophisticated and uses scientific and anatomical words associated with lobsters. He does this because his diction closely resembles that of his readers. He becomes much more articulate and knowledgeable, all in an effort to assimilate into the audience. They may not have an opinion on lobsters at the beginning of the text, but Wallace gradually manages to inject himself into their environment with his choice of words, and allow them to change their minds about this crustacean. Wallace then uses grotesque diction in the hopes that it arouses some sort of emotion. A “home lobotomy” or a “medieval torture fest,” this graphic diction will now be more powerful for audiences who have now embraced Wallace. He proves capable of being just as interested in the ethics of lobstering as he is in food, and I hope this diction achieves Wallace's goal of questioning the culture and morality of food. Wallace has an authentic and informative tone. Throughout the essay, Wallace does not choose sides. The essay composes impartial language and its tone distinguishes it as moderate. The reader is able to see that he is not like the typical food critic who usually fills his reviews with pretentious and inflated language. On page 7, Wallace admits that he considers animals inferior to man. Considering this is a food magazine, many writers would probably put animals on a pedestal. Readers can see that he is incredibly truthful in his writing; they can be sure he's not trying to play tricks on her. Everything he says here is authentic and based on information. Wallace is now able to make them understand the deeper meaning of this article and will most likely cause them to think critically about the subject, much like he has shown through his writings. Wallace's use of persuasive appeals is prevalent throughout the work. essay. It uses a series of emotional appeals to get the reader to sympathize with the animal. The main point of conflict in this article is that there is no clear answer as to whether these lobsters would feel the same pain as a human. Crowded together, huddled in a corner, fleeing passers-by, these are some of the sightings of lobsters stuck in the glass tanks at the festival. This paints a vivid picture in the reader's mind. The actions of lobsters in the aquarium. 2004.