Consider the Lobster

1. There are a few genres that I identified in this reading. I would consider this reading to either be classified as an essay or journalism piece. The author writes a lot of questions and doesn't seem to have a stance. They say that they aren't trying to preach about the "morality' of boiling a lobster alive, they are simply confused if people see it as cruel and morally incorrect.

2. The footnotes offer more information about certain topics and events that the author didn't choose to integrate into the story. For example, the author writes how lobsters have "nociceptors", as well as invertebrate versions of neurotransmitters. In the footnotes, it is explained that nociceptors is a neurological term for special pain receptors sensitive to temperature, mechanical forces. and chemical substances. The use of this footnote allows the reader to understand words that they might not necessarily mean.

3. The article does sift topics. It first talks about a Lobster Festival and what happens in one, then goes on to talk about how lobster was once a "poor person" food and the changes once again to talk about the possible presence of cruelty when a lobster is boiled alive. When the author says to "consider the lobster" I think they are asking us to morally decide if killing lobsters in the way that is most currently popular, is morally acceptable. There is little research to approve or disprove if lobsters feel pain. I think the author wants us to form our on opinion on whether we think it's right to kill and eat these creatures without fully knowing if they suffer or not.