In “Consider the Lobster”, David Foster Wallace has the opportunity to write a review for a magazine, Gourmet. Which is supposed to cover the Maine Lobster Festival which was held in the summer of 2003. However, the criticism was not at all as expected, rather it was based on ethics and morals in relation to the impact painful things we have about lobsters, like boiling them for fun. of our desires. By examining Wallace's use of descriptive strategy, we can see how high on the agenda the issue of animal cruelty is. This is important because most individuals intend to ignore morality when faced with this. By evaluating the strategy and what it creates; we can see how effective Wallace was in presenting his argument to the readers. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Wallace's main argument is that we should treat all animals humanely, like the lobsters and others mentioned in this case. He uses descriptive strategies to emotionally draw readers in through pathos. By describing the festival on how lobster tastes, then ending with how the lobsters are cooked, it creates this emotion of shock. From there, Wallace supports his main argument by providing us with images of how lobsters can feel pain, if they feel pain, and works to make the reader question why he ignores the obvious. Looking now at Wallace's overall goal, we can see the strengths and weaknesses that make up his argument. The description has an emotional appeal rather than constantly using logic. For example, he describes an image of "how lobsters are suspended for their dear lives, just as humans would when faced with a given life threat." He uses clear language to present his argument, as well as limited use of hidden assumptions, and defines several ideas behind terms through the use of footnotes. The organization of his logic unfolds as he descriptively creates an idea of ​​"how tasty lobsters are, and then aims for the perspective that his readers should think about their morals and ethics." On the other hand, considering both sides is not thorough enough to be fair. For example, he explains that “PETA works in a humane way towards animals, promoting their morality”. However, the morality of the other side seems to remain questionable. Also uses the either/or error when mentioning a statement made by a local that "they do their thing and we do our thing." These are some of the descriptive details that Wallace uses to make his point. The use of the descriptive strategy makes it possible to understand the global problem of cruelty towards animals. The arguments he makes using this strategy force us to agree that animals should be treated humanely. When he asks readers to imagine livestock being slaughtered, it makes them realize that we have an equal impact on all species and that lobsters should be no exception. Work allows us to think before we act, allowing questions from our unconscious to arise. For example, if we look at “the puppy mill seizure that took place locally in February 2016”. We could use this article to challenge our thoughts about the horror of treating an animal inhumanely. However, this work cannot provide us with answers to these..