Consider the Lobster, to me, was a very interesting and intriguing read. It took a spin on what others would consider normal and fun festival and really took to heart the concept and ideals behind it all. The author really made the article come together by focusing on the festival’s present and past history. In a nutshell, in comparison to our project two and how this would be a model text for the project, the author is trying to envelope all audiences that attend this festival or partake in its endeavors. He is trying to shape and change the opinion of those around him, therefore he must appeal to all types of people in attendance, not just one particular group of people. In relation to his text, he provides information that is relatable to the concept but easy enough for someone like me to be able to understand it and apply it wherever I need to apply it to within the document. One pitfall, or at the least, slight problem that I found within his document was that he provided some arguments which I felt as though countered the main point at which he was trying to make. For example, he discussed the pain of the lobster by boiling it alive, but in the next second gave information on how a lobster might not feel pain, or at least a pain which we could relate to; completely crushing a main point of his in the process. Perhaps he did this to give way to both sides, but it did not make much sense to me as a reader.