If you choose to submit a reading response for Yan Martel's Life of Pi, please do so in the comments section of this post. Remember: your response should be thoughtful, it should evidence a careful consideration of the text, and it should include at least one question for your instructor/your classmates about the text. Your response should be no less than 200 words and no more than 500 words, and at least relatively well-written (you will not be graded on grammar, but please remember that poor grammar/syntax reflects poorly on you/your ideas). If other students have posted before you, your response can be, in part, a response to their posts--feel free to take up other students questions or concerns and use this space as a forum for intelligent discussion. You may also post more than once, particularly if your initial post is short or ambiguous. Your grade for the reading response will be based on your collective input in the comments sections of this post.
Yann Martel’s Life of Pi has to be one of my favorite books that we have read. I am really enjoying it so far, and it seems less confusing than our previous book Slaughterhouse-Five.
ReplyDeleteWithin our first reading assignment there were a couple of things that I would like to comment on that I thought were interesting. First, within the first couple of pages was a quote by Pi, “Sometimes I got my majors mixed up. A number of my fellow religious-studies students- muddled agnostics who didn’t know which way was up, who were in the thrall of reason, that fool’s gold for the bright- reminded me of the three-toed sloth; and the three-toed sloth, such a beautiful example of the miracle of life, reminded me of God.” I thought this was a really interesting quote; both Pi’s majors (religious studies and zoology) conflict in some ways and in others are quite comparable. I like how he says that the people in his religious classes reminded him of animals in his other major, and that animals in zoology reminded him of religious subjects.
Another section of the book (pages 19 through 24) that seemed interesting was Pi’s description on animals idea of freedom. I thought this was interesting because I have NEVER thought of a zoo as a good place; I thought zoos were confining and a completely artificial means of keeping an animal locked up to benefit humans need of entertainment. After Pi’s argument I’m not exactly sure what I think now. He made a very valid argument; animals are kept safe and warm, are given all of their necessities plus more, and they have a place to call home without any interference. The quote that made me question my previous outlook on zoos was when he asked how we would feel if someone kicked us out of our home and said “go free!!” Even if his argument is manipulated to fit in favor of zoo’s, I think it was a very valid argument and should be considered… however I suppose we won’t ever find out the truth because animals don’t talk.
On another subject, something I liked very much was the part where Pi talks about how humans are actually the most dangerous animals in a zoo. There was a section where people could come “see what the most dangerous animal was” and then when they looked behind the curtain it was a mirror. I thought that spoke very highly of how some humans treat animals that are in zoos. He went over many things that have happened to animals because of humans (either on accident or intended). However, this section also made me question if humans are in the right to lock up animals in a zoo, even if they are given everything they need, because in my opinion many would be better off in the wild (freedom) rather than getting fed glass by humans in a cage.
So far I like Life of Pi. I think that parallel Pi insinuates between religion and zoos is very interesting. I think that he was trying to show that both religion and zoos are constricts that are put on society and are not necessary. He says that zoos are not completely bad for the animals; in fact they can be safer in many cases for the animals. They allow for them to survive easily and they do not have to do anything for themselves. On the other hand they create a fear of wild animals in humans. For example when Pi’s father feeds a goat to the Tiger to show how dangerous it is, he is trying to instill a fear of the animals in his children. Religion is similar in that it is not necessarily bad but it does tell us what to think and allows for us to not have to think for ourselves. Also religion makes us against those who believe differently than us. Pi questions the idea of zoos and religion.
ReplyDeleteHe talks about how many of the animals would not even leave if they were given the opportunity. This shows how they are not wild beasts who want to escape and destroy anything in their path. He also practices three religions at the same time peacefully, although his parents are not in favor of this. I think that with these two ideas he is showing how the constricts of religions and zoos are not needed if we can live morally with regards to other. For example, he says that animals will only attack when someone intrudes on their territory. This is a simple rule of nature and should not make wild animals more frightening. Pi probably would have wanted his father to teach them how to be safe and not annoy the tiger instead of trying to scare them.
Why does Patel include chapters of him in the future from someone else’s perspective?
Martha Gillespie
The Life of Pi is a very compelling book thus far and I have really enjoyed reading it. I would like to further discuss our topic about freedom that we had on Monday. Total bondage, if possible, in my opinion would cause a person to go completely insane. However, I believe this bondage would be totally impossible. Why? Because though one can lose a portion of freedom, they will always have the ability to think what they want. Also, they would have the freedom to move what they want whenever they want. Now going to the opposite of this, total freedom would also cause problems. This may be more possible than total bondage, but I believe that having total freedom would be less rewarding. In my opinion, people tend to lean towards having rules because that is just a part of life. For example, religion. Having faith in something gives one comfort and gives one a meaning of life in general. However, when investing into a religion, one must make sacrifices. Religions in general have certain rules that one must follow in order to be considered a devout person. People tend to sacrifice for religion because they believe having that comfort is worth giving up some of their freedoms. Whether this sacrifice is rewarding in the end will never be known until that person dies. So why do some people have religion in their lives if they do not know for certain that it has a reward in the end? Is it just in case, or is it because one truly believes and is willing to take that chance and invest in something that is not one hundred percent proven?
ReplyDeleteAnother point I would like to discuss is the fact that Pi and his family believe that an animal can truly happy being contained in a zoo. I believe that Pi made a good point in saying that if a cage at the zoo is all the animal knows, then of course they would not feel contained or kept from total freedom. Also, when he made the reference to a zoo being like a house is to us, I believe that that was a very strong comparison. I know that I am satisfied having everything I need under one roof, so why wouldn't an animal feel the same? They would have less fear and worries in their life and too me not having that stress would make life seem better.
I am looking forward to seeing how this story plays out and I believe that this book is by far my favorite one this semester so far.
I know that this is a work of fiction; however, I have trouble drawing the line between truth and fiction as I read. Perhaps this story is like a Hallmark movie, loosely based on a somewhat true story. The fact is, I have no idea. Fortunately, I can look past this and consider that the author is attempting to convey some point in writing a fictional account of a younger, less capable Noah of sorts.
ReplyDeleteSo instead of trying to figure out which parts of the story are real (if any) and which are not, I began to consider why. Why did the author choose to put a young man in this situation? Pi loses basically everything, and on top of this, he is now stuck in a boat with a bunch of wild, unpredictable animals. Soon, he is down to one wild, unpredictable animal, Richard Parker.
Much like the elephant in the room, Richard Parker is the lion in the boat. A large, daunting fact that simply cannot be overlooked, not matter how hard you try. Richard Parker represents a number of trying moments in our lives. The worst part is, you just cannot get rid of that lion. Instead, Pi realizes that he must overcome the lion. It is a powerful image, really. Just think, a 16 year old boy conquering a 500 pound lion.
I think the moral of this fable is that we all have lions in our lives. We are all subject to rough times at one point or another. We have a choice, though; we can give in or overcome. Why does Pi have to be in a boat with the lion? If he weren't in the boat, he could leave. In life, we cannot just walk away from every bad situation. Sometimes, you have to simply learn to live with it, and like Pi, let all of the smaller problems die, because they aren't quite as important.
My question: What is the significance (if any) of the name Pi? It seems that it would be chosen for some reason.
Now imagine that lion in my post was in fact a tiger, and we might be reading the same book...
ReplyDeleteEven though I am only halfway through, I can tell I’m really going to like the end of this book. So fat the part that has stood out to me as the most important is when the father fed the goat to the Bengal tiger in front of pi and his brother. Pi was very young and just like his father seemed to want it to; it left a deep impression on his son. Despite Pi’s mother’s wishes, the father went ahead to show the gruesome scene to his sons. This images impression is still ingrained in Pi’s head when he sees Richard Parker on the lifeboat. Granted if I saw a 450-pound Bengal tiger 20 feet away from me I might be slightly distressed as well.
ReplyDeleteThe religion question is also very important. The fact that he practices three religions is in itself an oxymoron. The first commandment in the bible is that thou shalt have no other gods before me. It also says that Jesus is the only way to heaven, I assume that the Koran and the Hindu holy book say something similar. The fact that he practices three religions means that he cannot truly believe in them all. Overlooking that I still really enjoyed the first half of the book. Does anyone else find this contradictory?
-William Osborne
In response to William's question:
ReplyDeleteI believe that in the author's mind, the contradiction has more to do with how we view religion than how Pi practices it. Even the idea that you could have three religions that believe in basically the same god, but each religion is completely independent is somewhat contradictory.
Simply put, the ambiguity of religious correctness really stands out in this book. Pi sees the beauty of each religion's god(s) in different parts of each practice. As he lives life, he is able to respect each of these religions as he sees how the practice can improve his life. To him, the story behind each god matters only because it is a story filled with morals and truths which he can recognize in his own life. To Pi, it is simply ridiculous to not respect the lessons of each story, as they all lead to the same place.
I think that you could actually look at this on a narrower scale; do not look at Christianity, Hindi, and Islam as examples of different stories, look at Christianity alone. Within this one religion, we find a multitude of accepted stories centered around the God of Abraham, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. Catholics believe in the distinct divinity of Mary; Pentecostals believe that speaking in tongues brings them closer to God; Quakers believe that modesty is a necessary part of praising God. Each of these religions believes in the same God, and further, the Holy Trinity. Each of these religions has a different story, or at least interprets the same story differently. So I ask, which is correct? I believe this is a question Pi dealt with; however, unlike most of us, his answer was all are correct in their own ways.
As we see at the end of this story (spoiler alert!) Pi is able to shape a story to the needs if his audience. If one story is unbelievable, he can tweek it in order to make it comprehensible for the right people. This begs the question, did each subgroup of humans develop a story of religion that made the most sense considering the intricacies of their interactions and cultural preconceptions, or is there an absolute truth and an absolute God? While I believe in the latter, I can certainly see the argument for the former.
Throughout this book the relationship between Pi and the animals seemed very interesting. The first section deals mostly with a detailed description of the zoo. In the zoo the humans I feel are portrayed as a god and in control. This was very obvious due to the fact that the humans provide these animal’s food and shelter. However, the Dad states that animals are very unpredictable and very violent sometimes. If they are not in the cage, the humans are no longer in control, giving the animals a “godlike” persona because the humans are fearful and powerless.
ReplyDeleteThe next section goes into more detail about these relationships. This section shows a friendship between Pi and a tiger. Also, it shows in many ways who is the powerful one between Pi and a tiger. The tiger is physically stronger and larger than Pi. This makes Pi fearful showing how the Tiger may have power over him. However, Pi is keeping the Tiger alive and feeding him. So that made me question who really was more powerful? I believe they are equally powerful and have a friendship and a special bond. The Tiger is a good companion for Pi in many ways. The tiger keeps Pi sane and occupied. This way he will not think about the tragedies that had just hurt him. Also, by helping the tiger, it gave Pi the will to live. He wanted to keep both of them alive even though the tiger was so dangerous. This brought out an entirely new perspective on the relationship between man and animals to me.
Lucas Garber
In reality, the second part of this book is extremely absurd, for Pi is learning how to survive on a boat with a 450 pound tiger, a hyena, and a zebra. Pi has just experience a tragic shipwreck, and he feels terribly lonely, hungry, and hopeless. He misses his father, mother, and brother, and he is willing to give up his life up at any moment. It is in this context that the tiger arrives to the scene. After the tiger comes onto the boat, in showing his dominance and great hunger, he kills the ape and hyena and he wants to kill Pi too. In comparison, just as the tiger fought and killed the ape and hyena, Pi learns the key to survival is to fight for all it is worth. Also, I believe Pi’s fear of the tiger motivates or strengthens his fight for survival. The narrator says, “I had to stop hoping so much that a ship would rescue me. I should not count on outside help. Survival had to start with me. In my experience, a castaway’s worst mistake is to hope too much and do too little. Survival starts by paying attention to what is close at hand and immediate. To look out with idle hope is tantamount to dreaming one’s life away.” Pi realizes he is all alone, and he does not want to deceive himself by looking towards others around him to save his life when in reality it seems to be unlikely to happen. It is during this time that Pi begins to look toward his inner being for survival and not towards his physical surroundings.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, it was interesting how the color orange, as stated in the book, represents survival. The color of this tiger is orange, and in a sense it is the tiger which keeps Pi alive, which leads me to ask this question, could the color orange represent some other meaning?
Taci Hodgins
When I was reading the third section of Life of Pi, I could not help but think about our theme for this class. After Pi has told the Japanese men his incredible story, they look at him as if he is ridiculous and they do not believe him. Pi then goes on to tell a different story where he has left out all of the animals. I remember one particular passage where Pi is trying to convince Okamoto-san and Chiba-san. He states “The world isn’t just the way we it is. It is how we understand it, no? And in understanding something, we bring something to it, no? Doesn’t that make life a story?” I thought that this passage showed the true ambiguity in truth and life in fiction. Our different experiences and the way we have been brought up shape the way that we see the world. To us what we see is the truth and to others what they see is the truth. How is it truth when two people see it differently, but yet to each person it is the absolute truth? We can see this problem in the way that different countries see war. In World War II the Germans saw the war, and the cause of the war, in a totally different way than the Americans did. However, who is to say that either one’s description of the war is truth? They both see their side as truth as it is shaped by their experiences. I think this quote also brings up the question of truth in fiction. Throughout the class we have discussed whether or not anything can ever be truth. I believe Pi would find this question to have an ambiguous answer as well. As he says in the third section, “doesn’t the telling of something always become a story?” Thus, even if a story is true to the reader it will always end up being a story because not everyone can experience it. However, does this make it an untruth?
ReplyDeleteI also wanted to quickly answer Taci’s question
about the color orange. To me it seemed that the color orange signified survival to Pi. We see this first of all in the orange colored life jackets. Life jackets are supposed to keep people alive by keeping them afloat. Another example of survival in orange are the orange colored whistles. These whistles end up being able to keep Pi alive by using them to train Richard Parker. We also see orange on Richard Parker. Richard Parker signifies survival to Pi by giving Pi a reason to live and to not focus too much on his despair of losing his family. When Pi is starting to give up hope of survival in the end of the novel he talks about how all the colors have been stripped down by the water. He mentions how the orange life jackets, whistles, and the tiger’s fur are also no longer bright. This shows that as Pi’s will of survival is wearing down, so is the color orange all around him.
--Kelcey Flegel
After finishing, "The Life of Pi", I found myself disappointed at the ending of the novel. I felt that the story lost its fascination when Pi told the two Japanese men a different story that he thought they would be more likely to believe. And then we never found out what the true story was. So I guess what I am trying to say is what was the point of the whole book then? Was it just to show how one can narrate a story however he or she wants and if the truth is not as interesting or fulfilling then why not build it up by adding the narrator's imagination. I have to agree that the story with the animals was more entertaining and more enjoyable to read, however, I just found it odd that after reading over three-hundred pages of this bizarre story then the author decides to add in this different story towards the end.
ReplyDeleteAlso, instead of making Pi look like this amazing survivor, the two Japanese men made him seem crazy and unreliable. Overall, I ended up feeling sorry for Pi because, all his life he was made fun of due to his name, then he lost his family because of a wreck, and after spending about a year stranded in the ocean with a wild tiger, he is finally rescued and taken care of by some people in Mexico. And still, after all that this poor boy has gone through, the two Japanese men still manage to poke fun at him and make his sound crazy. Why is that?
Overall, I did enjoy the novel until the end. I thought that the idea of the novel was fun and aloud me to image each scene occurring in my mind while reading which made the novel more enjoyable.
I have thoroughly enjoyed reading life of Pi. I think it I one of the most entertaining stories that we have read so far in this course. The beginning talks about animals so often that you know a huge chunk of this story is going to deal with them; also, the way it talks about religion is quite intriguing. I wasn’t sure what to think when he said he was practicing 3 religions at one time. I don’t understand how it is allowed/plausible. Does anyone think that it is okay to believe in more than one religion? I feel like they all have their basic structures and none of them are so similar that you can just merge them.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most entertaining parts of this book was the whole section on the Pacific Ocean. Although there were many parts that I know could stand to be written better, I thought it was the most entertaining. The part that bugged me the most was the zebra’s slaughter. First of all, you can’t live long without one leg because of all the blood loss; secondly, once you lose vital organs, you are definitely dead, not still living for a few hours after that! Some of the concepts were just a little far-fetched to me. One of the funniest parts of this section was where the flying fish were basically attacking the boat. After not eating food in quite some time, I was expecting Richard Parker to be going crazy and thoroughly enjoying himself with all the food.
The last thing that I want to comment on is the end of the story. I too, agree with Jen in that how do we know what the true story was? It was a total letdown to me to read over 300 pages in a book thinking that is what happened and come to find out that he is tweaking a lot of the facts to make it sound better. Why would he need to make the story seem more plausible if that is what actually happened?
-Allie Nicosia
For some reason, when reading the end of Life of Pi, I never once considered that the second story might be true. It was only after discussing it today in class that I really considered the fact that the original story was perhaps false. I think the main reason was that I spent so much time reading and becoming involved in the first story that I found it almost impossible to connect in any way to the shorter version. I also felt like the original story, whether factual or not, is more true.
ReplyDeleteI feel like it's kind of similar to what we said when we discussed Rashomon. Part of our discussion was whether the facts of what happened or the reasons why they happened were more important. This is one case when I believe that the facts aren't really important. What is important is the lessons that Pi learned, the way his time stranded at sea changed him, and what the reader can learn from what happened to him. The story of Pi and the tiger is crazy and hard to believe but the facts don't matter here. What matter is the fact that Pi survived through faith in a greater power and faith in himself.
On the question of Pi's religion, I saw his approach to be one of the most honest approaches to religion that I have ever encountered. I personally have always had a difficult time understanding the idea of organized religion and how so many people can all believe such similar things. However, Pi allows himself to believe fully in exactly what he thinks is true, even if that means that he practices multiple religions. I found his belief in multiple religions both possible and refreshing.
I truly enjoyed re-reading the Life of Pi due to the fact that I was able to pick up on certain details and crucial information that I missed previously. From this re-reading, I have actually drawn a few conclusions on the main theme of the story as well as what I believe the characters are meant to represent. I did not know beforehand that chapter 22 was meant to be the heart of the story, but after considering this idea, I now see how this ties into my ideas as well. (Especially the last few words concerning “missing the better story.”)
ReplyDeleteI believe that Pi represents people who believe in pure goodness and happiness. He is a character who leads a fairly simple life with good morals and strong religious beliefs. These beliefs regarding religion may be a bit different than most due to the fact that he mixes them freely, but it reinforces the idea that he is searching solely for true happiness without letting the facts bog him down.
The other characters in the book, however, represent, in my mind, people who are or are blinded by their own “factual evidence” about the world. These people miss the bigger and better story in life, which leads to happiness. For example, the different religious figures in the book are unable to comprehend how Pi can possibly believe in three religions. They have been told and teach others that only their way, only their “dry, yeastless factuality,” is what really matters. Pi though takes what he likes from each and creates true happiness beyond what they see. He is a more well-rounded and accepting person because of it. Another example of this includes the gentlemen at the end of the story. They choose not to believe the story that Pi tells because it goes against what they believe to be facts. For instance, they do not believe that bananas float until they are shown that they do. They are faithless and therefore will never discover the real truth, even when it is told to them by a first hand account. The idea of a young boy and a tiger cohabiting goes against factual information they have learned so far in life and therefore will believe only what they see as possible.
Through chapter 22 and Pi’s story, I think we can take away the idea that when you get bogged down with the factuality of life, you miss out on the best parts, or even the truth! We as humans need to find what makes us happy, believe what we want in order to fulfill this desire for happiness, and accept others ways of reaching happiness as well.
The Life of Pi shows that looking for the truth in a work of fiction is absurd. Because the book is fiction, it will never be true. At the Pi gives two different stories to the maritime investigaters. On page 352, Pi says, "You can't prove which story is true and which is not. You must take my word for it." I think this could be the thesis of the book. When you do not know the truth or even the whole story, you have got to learn to trust what you hear, or in this case read. Pi explains that the ship did sink, he was the only human surviver, and he landed in Mexico. These facts we accept as true; it is the events that happened in between that we question.
ReplyDeleteThis concept can be used when you think about history. There are certain events that take place that we know happen, the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, WWI, WWII, ect. We do not argue that these events happened, but we have to trust that the events that took place during these time periods are also true.
Ryan Stonaker
The second half of life of Pi was very good. I always thought the animals on the boat had a deeper connection to the story. I just wasn’t sure what. Now that it’s apparent what really happened I remember a few hints dropped along the way. I vaguely remember pi describing the orangutan as a motherly figure. At the time it wasn’t clear but now it seems obvious.
ReplyDeleteThe animals also seemed to represent the personalities of the people portrayed. A hyena in the wild is a vicious, malicious type of animal. The man the hyena represents acts just the same way. He is an arrogant Frenchman who eats the zebra, or Asian sailor. The Asian sailor seems properly portrayed by the zebra. I didn’t quiet understand why Pi thought of himself as Richard Parker, the tiger. It could be because he viewed himself as the boss on the boat. Pi’s mother being portrayed, as a motherly orangutan seems accurate but his detachment to his mother dying seemed odd. In the second version of the story he seemed to let his mother die without much resistance. If someone were attacking my mother no matter how weak I was I would stand up and fight.
I did not understand the floating landmass that he encountered while floating in the vast pacific. The meerkats on the carnivorous island were a bit hard to believe. Can someone enlighten me to what this landmass is or represents?
-William Osborne
The ending of the Life of Pi brings to mind the old adage “truth is stranger than fiction”. In many cases, we the reader or observer want the truth to be something relatively simplistic and easily digested. You can keep the complexities, the nuances, the idiosyncrasies and the improbabilities. The world makes much more sense to us if it’s black and white, bare bones, cut and dry facts.
ReplyDeleteNever mind that in life, as is the case in the Life of Pi, it would probably take much more skill, imagination, and intelligence to create a story like the one we follow for most of the book out of thin air. Now I realize that both stories are fictitious, since the entire book is a work of fiction. But if we apply some willing suspension of disbelief here, would it be easier for Pi to make up the first story or the second? The first story is somewhat unbelievable because of many of the occurrences within it, but in my mind becomes somewhat more believable in some senses because few people are gifted enough to make up a story like that. And those that are rarely are deluded enough to think anyone would believe it.
So if you were going to make up a story, for whatever unclear motive Pi might have in either case, you would make up something that’s easier to believe.
Of course, we could argue that which story is true is completely irrelevant, and we really need to be focusing on what Pi, and by extension the author, is trying to tell us in one or both stories, but that’s a completely different discussion.
Donte Lazarus
The Life of Pi was a very good read when placed on the scales of the reading list thus far. It was a bit misleading but the expansive classroom discussion led to an explosion of ideas that helps explain the story.
ReplyDeleteThe Life of Pi starts off alluding to be a quest into the realm of religious enlightenment and his quest to better his relationship with religion. The idea that he has personally adopted so three distinct religions gave me the impression this literary work was going to expand and relate on that scale. Sadly enough it was a side a long story that had minor relevance.
Pi's description of zoo's and how its tenants are not viewed as captors as many relate animals in zoos, gave me an idea of its relation with religion. Religion is technically the zoo keeper and we the people who follow religion are the zoo animals. As Pi describes that within these confines animals are safe, provided for, and provided with the best living conditions to which the animal does not see any more restrictive than the animal being in the wild. Because we are on the outside looking in, we see the confines and the restrictions. With religion we live within the same "restrictive" living conditions without much quarrel. Religion provides moral boundaries that we welcome daily without questioning what we are missing. This original form of zoo keeping has been place so long that we no longer question what if we are wrong... what if killing, raping, stealing, living adulterous, and the other moral commandments that we live by or not the way we should be living and that the aforementioned is the proper way to live... We live within a life/moral cage and we see nothing wrong with it, just as the animals live within a man-made adaptive boundary.
I thought that Life of Pi was an awesome and pretty moving book, especially once I finally got to the end of it. It was a little tedious in the middle, but the end was really meaningful. I would like to believe that the story about the animals was true rather than actual people. It was interesting that his story became so much more grotesque when it involved people instead of animals.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was reading I expected Richard Parker and Pi to become friends or something, but I thought it was cool that they didn’t because it made their relationship more genuine.
I thought that this book was a lot like The Road in that it showed how there can be goodness when it seems like there is no hope. For example, although Pi thinks he is going to die he is truly grateful when simple things, like food and water, come his way. The man and the boy in The Road also felt the same way when they found food or water. I also thought the books were similar in that they show how important companionship is especially when times are tough. I think this is a really beautiful lesson for people to learn.
I think that Pi decides to tell a different story of what happened with people to show that people only want to know the facts that they can easily believe. Patel is trying to prove that the facts are not as important as the lessons that come from stories. This is much like the Bible when people do not believe stories because they are unrealistic and therefore miss the message being taught. Pi’s original story seemed unbelievable so he changes it to a more believable story and still the outcome is the same.
Why does Pi say that Orange Juice was his mother and does anyone else find that story harder to believe when he says that?
Martha Gillespie
I found Life of Pi very interesting, and it is defiantly one of my favorite novels we have read this semester. While reading the book I found myself thinking that on one hand this story is so outlandish that it cannot possibly be true, but on the other hand I found myself wanting to believe everything that Pi says about his adventure in the lifeboat. I think that there is a constant struggle for Pi to decide what is acceptable in his life and death situation. It seems to me that the story Pi tells has some truth to it as do the other versions of the story he tells.
ReplyDeleteAt the end when he is speaking to the men about what happened to him, Pi feels that it does not matter what story he tells because they can never know exactly happened. For Pi his story that is full of animals and imagination is more entertaining. I also thought that by telling his story using animals it is easier for him to explain to others what happens. It is easy to forget while reading this novel how young Pi is and how difficult and horrible his journey must have been. By using animals in his story he does not have to come face to face with the cruelty that humans are capable of.
His ability to have a great imagination is related to his view of religion. Pi, who is religious, does not look down upon atheists because he can appreciate that they believe or imagine in something, that there is no god. He does however look down on agnostics because they do not have an imagination.
Overall I really enjoyed this book. It was entertaining and enjoyable to read. I believe that there are a lot of great messages and themes in the novel such as the importance of storytelling and imagination and also religion.
“Life of pi” is a very good book. This book allows me to think deeply about “Freedom” and “Survival”. “Life of pi” really impacts my former view of freedom. I have never thought about freedom in that way. What is real freedom? Do we really free? Is freedom the most important thing to human beings?
ReplyDeleteDifferent people may have different opinions about freedom. The true definition of freedom becomes a question early in Life of Pi, and Pi offers evidence to say that animal in zoos is not free in their movement. However, it is restricted by its survival needs and its instincts. In a zoo, where the animal’s needs are always provided, isn’t it freer? “Life of pi” gives readers a new view of freedom.
In this book, Pi can no longer choose to be a vegetarian because he must eat meat to survive. Throughout Life of Pi, the desire of living greatly restricts “freedom,” and thus redefines the word of freedom.
However, as we know, one thing is more important than freedom in this book. That is life. Pi was fighting for survival at sea. Everything he did is for living. Nothing is more important than his life. In the second story he told to Japanese men, stealing and killing are happening, and we must know that Pi is deeply principled and religious. We know that the story may be fictionalized, but the meaning inside tells me that freedom is a further pursue when you can meet your most basic needs like food and water, which many will agree. However, I got a question which is that if survival is more important than freedom, how freedom impacts survival?
Yinyin Shi
I was not as fascinated by this novel as most others have commented. This novel starts off with the offering of an old man, Francis to tell an annonymous author a story that would "help him to believe in god." Right away, no matter what the relation Pi has to Francis (a business partner to his father), I immediatley had it implanted in my mind that the story told by Francis is a TALE. The purpose of a tale being to teach a lesson. Whether Pi tells the story of his survival involving Richard Parker, a 450 lb tiger, or a real person, the story did not change nor did the lesson other than maybe don't tell a serious story of survival and religion by personifying animals to people in a present society. The animals are solely a way to make the story more entertaining, interesting and attention grabbing because we know that it cannot happen. We may be straying away from the fact a bit too much that this story is FICTION, in its entirety and debating which story is true or more likely is just an argument that we must agree to disagree on.
ReplyDeleteAs for the rest of this post I would like to adress a question posted earlier whether anyone thought it was ok to practice more than one religion. In many ways I was intriguied by Pi's fascination with Hinduism, Christianity and Islam. I enjoyed this aspect of the book because I was able to see that Pi does not have one specific belief. He chooses what he wants to believe in and I don't think there is aynthing wrong with that. Personally, I was raised Jewish. Yes, I believe in the teachings of Judaism. Do I believe Moses talked to a burning bush? No. Do I believe that he parted the Red Sea in order to set Jews free from the reighns of powertripping egyptians? No, they probably swam. But thats not the point, the point is that I can draw a sense of being and have some sort of faith in God. Pi is clearly not content with having "some sort" of faith. Pi constructs a multiple number of religions in order to fulfill what he truly believes in and block out what does not believe. Pi in a sense chooses religion and specific beliefs in a way more sensible way than we do.
--Zach Greenberger
I was very excited about this novel when I began to read it. I feel closely related to this story because of my similarities to Pi. My ethnicity is Indian, have lived approximately half of my life in Toronto, Canada, love animals, and enjoy studying and discussing religious views. This novel revolves around many of these and draws many analogies. I would like to write about the theme we discussed in class, which is "What is freedom”. Early on in the story, there is a parallel drawn between animal freedom and freedom in religion. This is mentioned towards the end of chapter four: "I know zoos are no longer in people’s good graces. Religion faces the same problem. Certain illusions about freedom plague them both" (page 21). I feel that Pi is contesting everyone's view that believes animals are not free at the zoo. He believes that since they are in a place where they are not in any sort of danger, and likely to have more resources, he feels that they are less free in the wild. The analogy to religion made this argument even more interesting. He also feels this way about freedom in religion, believing that many people view religion as confining them to a certain way of life. His opinion is that the exact opposite occurs and you become freer than when you practice a religion. These are the two illusions that Pi believes much of society is misguided by. What I wonder is would Pi truly still be adamant about his opinions, if he hasn’t studied zoology and religion, or does his expertise cause him to have very biased criticism for these specific topics?
ReplyDelete-Mark Menezes
John Osinski
ReplyDeleteLife of Pi searches to prove that contradictions in truth are insignificant; the only factor that matters is that you can eventually take sides in one version of a certain truth. For example, in the constant discussion of varying stories many people tend to only believe in stories that are inside their realm of possibility. Pi however, is a character who values taking a strong stand in something you believe in no matter how far-fetched it may seem.
I think a good example of this can be seen in the books ties with religion. To me a perfect outside example to explain this can be seen in Christians who believe in scientific evolution. Christians, as explained in the bible, should be creationists in that they believe that God created all life on Earth or The Adam and eve story. Despite this landmark truth in Christianity, many Christians in today’s age in a greater scientific understanding believe in a more concrete truth in Evolution. My uncle is a priest himself and he believes in evolution, however he thinks that evolution and the creation of the universe itself was sparked by God. Many Christians view the Adam and Eve story to be a parable used help visualize God’s influence on life rather being factual truth. This is another case in taking your stand in one truth amongst various other contradicting truths.
The part of the book that I liked is that it made me realize how confirmative I am in life and how sometimes I fail to realize the possibility of something other than what the common belief is to be true. Just as I would like to believe in creationism and that I was specifically made because it’s the “better story” as is the animal story is in the book as described by Chiba and Okamoto, I tend to lean towards evolution as they did with the human version of the story because it is more concrete and factual. It makes you admire people who take hold strong to a personal belief or truth no matter how scrutinized it may be.
In Life of Pi, Yann Martel seems to be suggesting that there is an importance to story-telling and that the "better story" is the more imaginative story. The world is an open book and how we run our lives decides how our individual stories are written. Through Pi, Martel is suggesting that it is not only how we live our lives, but rather how we tell about our lives that really defines our individual life stories. Certain events can happen but it is how we describe those events later on that will "truly" define what happened. I use truly loosely here for sometimes we have to stretch the truth in order to tell a "better story". As Pi claims "the world isn't just the way it is. It is how we understand it, no?".
ReplyDeleteIn this novel, the reader can choose which one of Pi's stories is the better story. One of his stories is inspired and the other one is more realistic. The Japanese men who rescue Pi decided that the more realistic story is the "better story" and Pi accepts that. Pi believes that God prefers the better story as well for Pi claims "And so it goes with God".
I feel that in some instances, telling a more imaginative story is better than telling a realistic story when both stories are based on the same events. For entertainment purposes such as cinema and theatre, an exaggerated story will generate much more interest than a story that is considered real-life fiction. However, I believe that there is a fine line that we should not cross. When we as humans start to trick ourselves to believe that our exaggerated telling of the facts is actually what really happened, reality becomes blurry and we tend to wander farther and farther from the actual truth. In keeping with our theme for this entire course, it is still important to see what the actual truth is in a fictional story and not get caught up in all the inflated points that just try to make the story seem more entertaining.
Mark Doran
In Life of Pi, Yann Martel seems to be suggesting that there is an importance to story-telling and that the "better story" is the more imaginative story. The world is an open book and how we run our lives decides how our individual stories are written. Through Pi, Martel is suggesting that it is not only how we live our lives, but rather how we tell about our lives that really defines our individual life stories. Certain events can happen but it is how we describe those events later on that will "truly" define what happened. I use truly loosely here for sometimes we have to stretch the truth in order to tell a "better story". As Pi claims "the world isn't just the way it is. It is how we understand it, no?
ReplyDeleteIn this novel, the reader can choose which one of Pi's stories is the better story. One of his stories is inspired and the other one is more realistic. The Japanese men who rescue Pi decided that the more realistic story is the "better story" and Pi accepts that. Pi also believes that God prefers the better story as well for Pi claims "And so if goes with God".
I feel that in some instances, telling a more imaginative story is better than telling a realistic story, when both stories are based on the same events. For entertainment purposes such as cinema and theatre, an exaggerated story will generate much more interest than a story that is considered real-life fiction. However, I believe that there is a fine line that we should not cross. When we as humans start to trick ourselves to believe that our exaggerated telling of the facts is actually what really happened, reality becomes blurry and we tend to wander farther and farther from the actual truth. In keeping with our theme for this entire course, it is important to see what the actual truth is in a fictional story and not get caught up in all the inflated points that just try to make the story seem more entertaining.
Mark Doran
I like the moral lesson that I found quite a lot in this book. The spirits that Pi showed from the very beginning of the book is very amazing. How he was being patience to his friends that keep mispronouncing his name and his curiosity and how much effort and interest that he showed about religion and zoology. When he has to be separate from his family and alone by himself, he did not give up and give his best to survive and protect himself at the same time. The loses of his family and things that happened after that helped him to turn into a big guy, who is stronger and ready to face the world all alone. Instead of being down to the loneliness and sadness, he took everything as in a positive way. Not to mention how he thanking God because a positive thought of how lucky he was to be safe and how God loves him so much, that he still has a chance to stay alive. The religious part that showed pretty well in this book and I personally love it, Pi obviously have faith that it is true that God is the one that always behind him and help him all the time. His curiosity and willingness to learn more about Christianity and Islam is very impressive; his thought about how all religions actually have the same purpose and for human good is very true because really there is no religion that thought you to do bad things or actions. If you put more time to read and absorb the actions and sentences from the story, you can learn much deeper religious side of this book.
ReplyDeletepoppy aprilia
Is there absolute truth in the world? After reading “Life of Pi”, When Pi retells the entire story to make it more plausible to the officials who are questioning him; I cannot help but think about our theme the “real truth”.
ReplyDeleteSometimes we just don’t want to know the real truth or what we believe is not true. Pi asks the officials which story they liked better. They know that no matter what Pi says, it will not affect the information they are searching for—how the ship sunk. This question implies that truth is not absolute; the officials can choose to believe whichever story they prefer, and that version becomes truth.
As the stories in Rashomon, different people have different opinions about the truth. Each version will be believed by some people. Which one do you want to believe that depends on your own because there is no an absolute truth for that. Everyone is saying their own stories that benefit themselves, and others will think about those stories from their own perspective. Pi argues to the Japanese officials that there is invention in all “truths” and “facts,” because everyone is observing everything from their own perspective.
There is no absolute truth. Like Adam Hardesty said “If one story is unbelievable, he can tweak it in order to make it comprehensible for the right people”. So what is truth? I think sometimes truth is what you want to believe. What do you think about “what is truth”?
Yinyin Shi
To me the Life of Pi is a book about overcoming obstacles and exploring spirituality. The author takes us through the many experiences lived by the character such as having his name changed, surviving 227 days at sea and his pursuit of truth which lea him to experience three very different religions. While reading the book I was trying to constantly guess the outcome of each of the challenges he was facing and was surprised at every time. We could read about all the emotions he was going through and relate to them in some sort of way, whether it was despair, determination or willingness to survive and I just admired it and placed myself in his place (not with the tiger and all those animals because it would not be very credible), but I imagine how I would act if I was stranded in the middle of the ocean how would I react? For that reason even though I have never lived a similar experience I imagine how I would react being in a similar situation and can somehow better understand the emotions he shows throughout the story.
ReplyDelete“Life on a lifeboat isn’t much of a life. It is like an end game in chess, a game with few pieces. The elements couldn’t be more simple, nor the stakes higher.”
This quotation to me has a lot of meaning it clearly states all the he was gone and is still going through. He says that life on a lifeboat is not much of a life and considering the conditions in which he is we have to agree because there is not much he can do he does not have any luxury only the bare minimum .By comparing life to an end game in chess with only a few pieces we could think about everyone who has already died and the few that are left. Even though the elements are simple the stakes are definitely higher because as time goes by the chances of surviving seem smaller and death seems more imminent and that shows that the stakes are definitely higher.
Rossana “Xana” Guerreiro
When I was reading this book I was not sure that I would really like it. However, once I got to the end, I realized the point of this book and that it had greater meaning than just a boy who survives on a boat with a tiger. The plot of the novel seems hard to believe because it is all being recalled from Pi's memory. Any psychologist can say that it would be difficult to remember everything that happened especially with the boy being exhausted and traumatized from the terrible event that took his family's life. At the end of the novel when Pi is recalling the events to the men, they do not seem to believe him. Instead he tells them a shorter, what seems more believeable story. The shorter story basically summed up all that we had taken the entire book to read. Pi then says, "So tell me, since it makes no factual difference to you and you can't prove the question either way, which story do you prefer? Which is the better story, the story with the animals or the story without?" So it seems that they like the more entertaining story though it may not be as believable. However, the point of Life of Pi seems to be that the telling of the story doesnt really seem to be that important, but instead that the events in the story took place.
ReplyDeleteWas the whole story an illusion? Which story is true? Does our main character use his knowlege of animals to compare the animals on boat to people from the boat? How do his multiple religous beliefs affect his tory including the animals? These are some of the unanswered questions at the end of the book that I still am unsure about.
ReplyDeleteSomeone said something in class to the extent of, the story doesn't really matter. You can choose to believe it or not but there are some facts in each story. The boy, the boat sinks his family dies are in each story. Whichever you prefer to believe you still get the main plot of the story. I thought this went along with our discussion of the boys religous beliefs. No matter what you practice religously you believe in the big picture which is God. So if you belief in a god it shouldn't matter which one or how you worship them. The details of what happend out in the ocean really don't matter because the two stories give you the same outcome. Although it sounded kind of fishy to me and think the boy was probably delusional. But when reading this story and after our discussions I see that we must look past the little truth stuff to see the big Truth.
The Life of Pi was a pretty interesting and though provoking book for me. It made me think about the things I would have done if I was in Pi’s situation, both the factual, and also the version with the animals. A lot of the time I want people to get straight to the point when they are telling me a story, but what this book makes you think about is whether the facts are what you should focus on. The Life of Pi complicates our understanding of truth by suggesting that factual truth might not be the best truth. This idea is something that I particularly have trouble with and can learn from.
ReplyDeletePi tells the whole story of him surviving the ocean for a long time with Richard Parker only to tell us a completely different story at the end of the novel. Many people would be really concerned with the second story, but you don’t get nearly the thematic truths out of it as the first. Both stories are exactly the same in Pi’s point of view. The Japanese investigators were mostly concerned with determining how the ship sank, and didn’t really get what they were looking for out of either of the stories. They did acknowledge that the first story was better than the second. You can’t really experience the emotions from the factual truth in the same way you can from the story with the animals. You could also think that Pi might have been trying to insulate himself from the factual truth and didn’t want to think about his survival in that way. Pi finds the story with animals to be much more inspiring and to hold much more truth for more people.
I thought that the part of the story with the carnivorous island was particularly interesting. I think it represents despair eating away at him and the idea that help will never come. For Pi, staying on the island would have meant giving in and dying. The whole story with the carnivorous island achieves sending a more complex and emotional message to the reader that the factual truths could not hope to accomplish. In ways like this, the first story is infinitely superior to the second and shows us that the factual truth is no always the best truth.
-Sean Graham
The life of Pi was a great novel to me that I really enjoyed reading. One of the contexts of the text that I believed outlined moral truth was when the father placed Pi and his younger brother in front of the tiger’s cage and forced them to watch it eat a goat. In most cases people would think of this to be wrongful doings and not civilized. But the more I thought about it, the father was more or less trying to put fear into the children’s eyes because he didn’t want them being foolish and playing around the tiger’s cage.
ReplyDeleteGoing off Adam’s post, I too had a real difficult time too realizing what was real and what was fake, though we find out within the last few pages that everything was stretched just a little bit. The question was, what was the exact purpose of stretching the truth on EVERYTHING, including the animals on the boat. The thing that killed me was that after the hyena killed the orangutan and the zebra and the tiger kills the hyena, Pi is left with this tiger. The thing that got me about this is that it seemed that yes, Pi was training the tiger and becoming close with it, but do you think that if Pi stopped providing fish for him and keeping him nurtured that Pi would still be alive?
The one thing that really got me confused on this book was when Pi and Richard landed on the island. This place was crazy and I kind of felt like he was just dreaming about it as people have done in past novels. The fruit with teeth in them made me reread what I had just encountered a few times. After Pi finds out the island “eats people” they leave. My question for the class is that in knowing how dangerous a tiger is out at sea, would you rather take your chances on the island that supposedly ate people or on a raft with a hungry tiger.
I really enjoyed this novel but it kind of lost some touch to me when I found out that everyone on the boat was really a human. The fact that he was on the boat with these animals kept you on your toes because you didn’t know when the tiger would get hungry and eat the poor boy.
-David Erbacher
This is the second time I have read this book, and I definitely found it more interesting than the first time. I think it is because I already knew the twist at the end, so it made me analyze each animal's character more in the middle of the book. Overall I think that Life of Pi is a great book, and it has many themes within it.
ReplyDeleteThe first theme that I want to discuss is Religion and Zoos. I think that when Pi is talking about animals being unconfined and being able to do what they want, is actually talking about they way we think about religion. Like a zoo, we are supposed to be confined into only believing one religion. To Pi though, he thinks that one should be able to believe in as many religions as they want just like animals being able to do what they want.
Another interesting thing about the book is Richard Parker, the tiger. The tiger wants to kill Pi and Pi is very scared of this. As the story goes on, Pi realizes that to survive he must not rely on others but on himself, and he realizes that he has to show the Richard Parker that he is more powerful than him. In reality a 16 year old boy taming a 400 something pound tiger is ridiculous. When we find out that he survives on the boat by himself, and he says that he turned to God, it makes you wonder what the tiger is actually symbolizing. I think that Pi over coming the tiger is supposed to be a symbol of Pi overcoming a the always looming "big obstacle" in ones life. When it comes to religion, one could argue that someone who tries to live a pure life will be taking care of in times of need.
To touch on the subject of which was the true story, I feel that Yann Martel purposely wrote it this way to leave it up to the reader to decide which story is true. I also think that he knew that people would choose based on the type of person they are.
I enjoyed Life Of Pi. I particularly enjoy the character Pi because he made me see as well as think of things differently that I had once before. When he explains how zoo’s are places animals like and appreciate and he even goes further to tell us stories about animals that escape only to return. I always saw zoo’s as a place that imprisoned animals never thinking the flip side that they liked them but Pi made a convincing argument that they get everything they need and have to do little work. I enjoyed the idea of Pi and his family living and growing up in a zoo, he had a whole other view on life that most of us don’t have. He also stated the question what would be do if someone came into our homes and said go free! He made animals seem so human like in their names, characteristics and actions. This scared his father into teaching him and his brother a lesson inevitably but I found it interesting he saw personalities in each animal.
ReplyDeleteWhen Pi speaks about religion and zoology and that close linkages between the two. They both constrict their inhabitants and might not be the choice of the individual. I stated in class that religion can constrict a person and gives them rules and limitations which they might want and accept but others might not want them or accept them but have no choice because its what their peers, society or parents want. This same constriction occurs in zoo’s you can argue for or against zoo’s and if they are humane or not but a zoo does in the end limit its inhabitant.
At times when reading this book I stopped and tried to decide what is truth and what is false. It is easier to stop trying to find the thin line between the two and take the story for what it is. When Pi finds himself trapped on a boat with the animals and then just Richard Parker he realizes that this animals isn’t just the Richard Parker he watched from a safe distance in the zoo but now an actual real life threat to his life. He can’t give it a perky or interesting personality he has to see it for what it is and that is what we have to do in our daily lives. Take what is given to us and do with it what we can. All Pi can do it deal with the situation the best because he has no idea what is to come just like in our daily lives we live it the way we know how because we have no ultimate control over the future.
My favorite thing about Pi is that he practices three religions simultaneously and practices each of them properly. I found it funny that all three of the church leaders of the separate religions found it so appropriate to scream and shout at a little boy about religion instead of appreciating the young boys interest and love in each of them. I think it speaks highly of Pi that he found himself in each and loved them deeply and at times found similarities between the three.
Jessica Phillips
The book “Life of Pi” was very complicated like a poem. At the beginning of story and when Patel talked about his story, I thought he was using metaphor to describe the Indian history, colonized by British and had conflicts with them. I know the novel itself was not about the war and history, but his story was able to match with the history, oddly enough. The Richard Parker (England) was outlaw in the boat, also, killed and eaten other animals (other competitors), and it threatened Patel who is from India. This was my wrongful response of his story at the first time. However, when he told his story in different way, it was more made sense. As brief story, his mother was nursing an injured person, and an English speaker was an outlaw in the boat. At this time of reading story, I feel like Japanese’s opinions are more reasonable. However, the author wanted to emphasize his thesis that truth cannot be same as what you believe. For example, Japanese argues that bananas cannot be float, but actually, it was capable to float. People do not accept the truth until they face and they prove the facts logically. This example gave me an idea that some of the truth cannot be proven, so it should be believed without logical determination. I think this kind of truth is alike UFO issues. It could be true but can be false.
ReplyDelete-Ryan Yoon-
Life of Pi by Yann Martel is a very interesting story especially during the beginning when Pi talks about his varying religious practices. I never thought about religion the way Pi does which is he does not think he has to choose one type of religion and stick to only that one. He believes every religion has great teachings, stories, morals, and beliefs and therefore he wants to learn and practice all of them. He ends up practicing Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity which two of them have parallels with each other, excluding Hinduism, and share a same god. Pi’s idea that you don’t have to practice one single baffles each one of his religious mentors and his atheist parents. When they do find out that he is practicing other religions the religious leaders don’t seem to want him around anymore and often scorn him for not picking one religion in particular. This seems to go against everything that religion should be about which is complete openness to people who want to learn about their religion no matter their beliefs. The idea that just because a boy believes that different religions aren’t mutually exclusive makes him an outcast to each religion is ridiculous. I like Pi’s outlook on religion and I myself believe there is much more to learn about faith if we explore and practice different religions.
ReplyDeleteLife of Pi to me was very interesting. It was interesting because it explored different religions and how Pi practices more than one religion. The story is ultimately about the story of how Pi, told by Pi, and how he survived a long journey throughout the ocean. At the end of the book we are told a completely different story, which makes us wonder what actually happened and who we should believe. Although the stories are different, they both share some facts. They both involve Pi, the boat sinking, and his family dying. This kind of makes the stories the same because they have the same basic idea so we don’t really have to choose a story to believe.
ReplyDeleteI also feel that the book is kind of discredited by the fact that the story is being told completely by what Pi remembers happening and that takes away from it because it is impossible to remember every event that happened. Pi does a good job by asking which story is preferred because neither can be proven correct so it lets us know that the story itself is not the important thing, but what events are what’s important.
-Ryan Cormack
Life of Pi to me was very interesting. It was interesting because it explored different religions and how Pi practices more than one religion. The story is ultimately about the story of how Pi, told by Pi, and how he survived a long journey throughout the ocean. At the end of the book we are told a completely different story, which makes us wonder what actually happened and who we should believe. Although the stories are different, they both share some facts. They both involve Pi, the boat sinking, and his family dying. This kind of makes the stories the same because they have the same basic idea so we don’t really have to choose a story to believe.
ReplyDeleteI also feel that the book is kind of discredited by the fact that the story is being told completely by what Pi remembers happening and that takes away from it because it is impossible to remember every event that happened. Pi does a good job by asking which story is preferred because neither can be proven correct so it lets us know that the story itself is not the important thing, but what events are what’s important.
-Ryan Cormack
I think that one of the most important questions raised when reading Life of Pi is whether the outcome of an event is more important than the event itself. This question was talked about quite a lot during class, both in relation to Life of Pi and in relation to other books we've read. I feel like it was something we talked about a lot in our discussion of Rashomon and Slaughterhouse-Five.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of Life of Pi, you have to wonder how important it is to know the truth about what happened to Pi when he was lost at sea. I think initially it would seem that all that matters is that he survives. We shouldn't care about what he had to do or what happened as long as we know the end result of his journey.
However, after getting involved in the story and being very disappointed in the alternate story featuring the humans instead of animals, I realized that it really is more important to know about the journey. The reason why Pi lived is because of what happened to him and the person he is and will grow to be in the future is a direct result of his time spent lost at sea. After contemplating this, I've realized that this can relate to Billy Pilgrim's approach to life in Slaughterhouse-Five. Instead of focusing on the endpoint (death), Billy chooses to focus on the present. This is much like the dilemma in Life of Pi. Instead of choosing to focus on the outcome of the journey, it is much more important to focus on the journey itself.
I really enjoyed the Life of Pi. I primarily liked his outlook on religion. Pi is open-minded about the three religions, Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity, and finds good things to take from all of them. I too view religion like Pi does which is the belief that God definitely exists and we should worship him but the specific manner in which we choose to worship is not as important as simply believing. Pi doesn’t even mind the atheist because the atheist is still a believer. They just believe that God is not real just as much as Pi believes he is. However it appears that his survival instinct on the sea might have superseded his spirituality for a little while.
ReplyDeleteA big part of the story with Pi and Richard Parker deals with the relationship of man vs. animals. In Pi’s eyes, as long as we treat the animals with respect, we can all get along. It was this understanding that kept Pi alive in the boat. But like so many have posted before me, what are we supposed to take from this book? Previous books we have read had a much clearer purpose for being written. He practices three religions and has a good connection with animals that ultimately keeps him alive on the open ocean. By the Japanese men questioning Pi’s story at the end, I guess we are supposed to ask ourselves which story, if either, we believe. Also, since Pi did survive for that long on that boat with wild animals, should it even matter how he survived or just that he did?
Jeff Kibler