Also, by starting the article as a critique of the event, Wallace draws in readers who are likely to prepare lobsters in the very way that bothers him.
Now that they’re reading, he has the potential to make them consider their choices.
However, due the demand of lobster, in my opinion, these practices are sure to continue.
] On the first day of College Writing II, I have an expectation that my students have, to some degree, mastered the mechanics of writing, as laid out in the Rubric.
Likewise, I have found that explaining how to handle and select evidence can be managed through dialogue that I model and repeat.
I can ask them questions and I can give them a format to follow, until they earn confidence in all of these areas, at which point I expect them to break the ritual and find more creative ways to engage with their evidence or write their thesis, while still maintaining the connections that are required in academic writing.
The organizational process seems to be the one that I, personally, go back to even after I am finished writing, just to make sure the paper is as effective as possible.
You may remember, from the Voyant Tools: Close Reading Blog, that my 10am College Writing II class created a Voyant Tools analysis on David Foster Wallace’s “Consider the Lobster”. “Trends” is the line-graph tool on the top right of the analysis.
This is literally my advice in every other segment of the rubric (except MLA formatting, that is what it is).
Organization, however, is unique in that only the author knows what he wants to prove and the bank of evidence he has in his corner.