Consider the Lobster (2004) [pdf]

http://www.columbia.edu/~col8/lobsterarticle.pdf

by mahathu • 5 years ago

100 35 5 years ago

atorodius• 5 years ago

Great essay, I think this text started what eventually led to me reading infinite jest :)

spenczar5• 5 years ago

If you get a chance, A Supposedly Fun Thing I’ll Never Do Again is really terrific too. I love Infinite Jest, but I think I love DFW’s essays even more. They are just the right length.

eckmLJE• 5 years ago

Agreed, there is an essay collection named after Consider the Lobster that has some great ones. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consider_the_Lobster

dhosek• 5 years ago

I found A Supposedly Fun Thing to be rather grating and self-congratulatory. In contrast, the essays in Consider the Lobster showed a better balance between restraint and indulgence.

sofard• 5 years ago

The whole book of essays is incredible. He wrote this just a few weeks after 9/11. I'm amazed it was published at the time. https://www.rollingstone.com/feature/david-foster-wallace-on...

lelandfe• 5 years ago

Not to veer too far off topic but had to take the chance to share Hunter Thompson’s piece he wrote the week after 9/11, which similarly, I’m surprised was published: https://www.espn.com/espn/page2/story?id=1250751

65• 5 years ago

One of my favorite DFW stories is Good Old Neon in Oblivion.

pauldavis• 5 years ago

OMG that is such genius. Chilling. Love it.

goodoldneon• 5 years ago

Judging by my username, I think I like it too :)

adamgordonbell• 5 years ago

It's crazy that he wrote this for a food magazine. I think when they sent him on this assignment that this was not at all what they were expecting to get back.

kcrx• 5 years ago

The tiny chef’s hat icon signaling the end of the essay really makes it great.

dang• 5 years ago

Not as much past discussion as I thought. I must have confused it with the water one.

Consider the Lobster (2004) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8407616 - Oct 2014 (48 comments)

David Foster Wallace, "Consider the Lobster." Aug 2004 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1562677 - July 2010 (1 comment)

downut• 5 years ago

I loved the writing in this essay but disagree with the conclusion. Let's just say that I doubt that individually wrapped grocery store meats are apex civilization, and no human civilization every thrived without exploiting[1] animals. The exploitation has always been performed across the spectrum of cruelty[2], but the fact of it is incontrovertible. So the essential flaw in the logic, I think, is that, very unusual for DFW, he missed the more important widest context.

My favorite DFW essay (out of oh so many) is "Tense Present"[3]. I bought the Garner because of it. I've read it more than twice, and I very rarely read things more than once. I recommended it to a friend and she came back and said, "That's why you are the way you are, you're a snoot!". I laughed.

[1][4] "exploiting" chosen to make the meaning explicit.

[2] I try hard to minimize the cruelty in my practice; profit based exploitation rarely does. Neither does a pack of African wild dogs, nor the tarantula hawk dragging the much bigger tarantula across my yard.

[3] Possibly unreadable font, might be others out there: https://harpers.org/wp-content/uploads/HarpersMagazine-2001-...

[4] DFW correctly (yah, that's redundant) used 1 based footnote numbering.

will4274• 5 years ago

My favorite DFW essay (out of oh so many) is "Tense Present"[3]. I bought the Garner because of it.

Thanks for the recommendation. I laughed out loud at this line:

He's both a lawyer and a lexicographer (which seems a bit like being both a narcotics dealer and a DEA agent).

bigchoke2• 5 years ago

The morality of meat consumption is something I've struggled with in the past as well. If I'm being completely honest the reason I've never stopped is simply convenience in both macro and micro nutrient availability. This has completely put me off lobster though, won't lie.

akimball• 5 years ago

Other fat sources are healthier, and other protein sources are less perishable/risky. It is annoying to abstain meat in most restaurants, but this is rapidly improving. My own sweet spot compromise is ovo-lacto-pescatarianism. I eat lots of nuts, and supplement protein when I work out. Sugar being poisonous, I mostly substitute fats for calories. Works for me anyhow, once I got used to it. Maybe insects will be a thing some day

bigchoke2• 5 years ago

My hope is cloned meat! Wouldn't mind paying a little extra for it. And you are absolutely right, having a meatless diet is getting progressively easier.

micromacrofoot• 5 years ago

i’m hoping for insects, cricket flour is a very good source of protein… but very expensive at the current scale

getlawgdon2• 5 years ago

Vegetables and fruit rank next to poultry on the top of the food pathogen list. Raw flour can and does carry Salmonella. Food pathogenicity is where you think it will be and often where you don't think about it at all.

jalino23• 5 years ago

nothing happens when I click the link?

jallen_dot_dev• 5 years ago

It's a link directly to a PDF. Did your browser save it to a folder? Or maybe there is a popup asking if you want to save or open.

MaxBarraclough• 5 years ago

The link is broken for me too. Archive.org has a snapshot:

https://web.archive.org/web/20211206162647if_/http://www.col...

reggieband2• 5 years ago

This may be the most gen-x piece of writing ever.

It reminds me of early Simpson's episodes. The juxtapositions of pointless and detailed erudition, obvious humor and subtle satire, and breaking the fourth-wall moral mirror. It's equal parts brilliant, snarky and trivial.

I generally find DFW unbearably pretentious, but there is something sublime about an article like this getting published, with all of those footnotes, in a food magazine. Something about it reminds me of the performance art of Andy Kaufman.

It's strange to me that I've heard of this essay probably hundreds of times yet this was the first time I actually read it.

getlawgdon2• 5 years ago

Pretentious means to pretend to be someone/something one is not. DFW was definitely as brilliant as he "appeared to be".

I won't get into details because it is very personal, but DFW did something staggeringly generous and selfless and thoughtful for a close friend of mine -- a friend who was also a complete stranger to DFW at the time.

The pat "DWF/pretentious" critique which is heard from time to time seems to be to be pretty ignorant of what he wrote, why he wrote, and who he was. And that little insight I got of him gave me a deeper appreciation for what he published.

reggieband2• 5 years ago

I am not trying to speak ill of the dead. I am expressing my opinion on their work. The work of an artist is not immune to criticism because they were a nice person.

I read Ian M. Banks for the first time recently. About halfway through "Player of Games" I realized what an enormous talent that man has for writing. It snuck up on me, it took me by surprise. I think of the Italian word Sprezzatura and the Wikipedia summary: "a certain nonchalance, so as to conceal all art and make whatever one does or says appear to be without effort and almost without any thought about it". In my estimation Banks does this, he artfully conceals just how good he is at what he is doing.

In contrast, when I read DFW I feel as if he is poking his talent into my face over and over again. Even in this essay, I feel an overbearing sense of how good it is. The DFW writing I am familiar with lacks the ease I appreciate.

I prefer when artists downplay their ability and express it subtly. That doesn't mean that an artist must do this to be good writer or a good person. Some artists will stretch themselves to the very limit of their abilities in an attempt to express themselves in a way they find satisfying or meaningful. And if I find that tedious or unbearable to read then that doesn't necessarily make me ignorant.

cogburnd02• 5 years ago

http://www.godhatesshrimp.com/

freediver2• 5 years ago

One small step for humankind, but a giant one for lobsters occurred a few days ago when the UK government officially recognized them (together with octopus and crabs) as sentient beings:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/lobsters-octopus-and-crab...

If you do not read the whole original article, read just this excerpt.

"If you’re tilting it from a container into the steaming kettle, the lobster will sometimes try to cling to the container’s sides or even to hook its claws over the kettle’s rim like a person trying to keep from going over the edge of a roof. And worse is when the lobster’s fully immersed. Even if you cover the kettle and turn away, you can usually hear the cover rattling and clanking as the lobster tries to push it off. Or the creature’s claws scraping the sides of the kettle as it thrashes around. The lobster, in other words, behaves very much as you or I would behave if we were plunged into boiling water (with the obvious exception of screaming)."

Switzerland banned boiled them alive a few years ago https://kottke.org/18/02/switzerland-makes-it-illegal-to-boi...

pvaldes3• 5 years ago

the UK government officially recognized them as sentient beings

And the real consequences of that joke are?...

Will Mr Johnson reprove the thousands of governments that use seafood to feed their population and avoid famine, suffering and death of millions of people?

freediver2• 5 years ago

No one argues there against eating them, but the cruelty of boiling them alive (as they are sentient).

hideo7746• 5 years ago

Is this an attempt at satire? I mean, the lobster actually reacts to imminent death whereas you've chosen to personify inanimate and already dead lettuce. Do you believe they are the same? I am baffled.

Consider the Lobster (2004) [pdf]

Related Stories