Life of Pi
discussion
Which version did you beleive?
message 1:
by
Floramanda
(last edited Aug 25, 2016 12:33PM)
(new)
-
rated it 3 stars
Sep 17, 2007 10:46AM

reply
|
flag



Also, I already believed in God when I started reading this book, and I didn't really see it as a convincing argument to believe in God. I thought, from the beginning scenes in Pondicherry, that they might have included more religious or philosophical mental debate while Pi was on the boat, but it didnt' happen and it was kind of disappointing. The ending made sense as a way--it definitely offered a reason to believe in God, rather than a convincing argument. The "dry, yeastless" world we live in can be soul-killing, so you might as well believe in something else to get through it.

I also want to say that I absolutely loved this book and could not put it down once he got on the raft. I thought it was extremely well written and truly touched me. I'm not sure that everyone leaves as touched as I did (my aunt and mom did not), but for whatever reason I think this book was amazing and beautiful! I'm not sure if the book made me believe anymore in God than I already did, but it definitely made me believe in the power of the human mind ten fold!


I loved the book too - amazing, amazing, amazing. Did not feel any argument to believe in God because of it, rather in human survival instinct. But loved it!

It initially struck me as a way to explain some of the styles of writing within the Bible. I struggle with the Bible, because there so many stories within that appear to be fictitious to me.
If the story about the people illustrates what actually happened, then the story about the animals is a way to illustrate the same story with the people, in a more creative exciting way.
I feel that perhaps this same device may have been used in generating some of the stories of the Bible to make them more interesting and readable, though not necessarily untrue.
Just think, if the entire book of 'The Life of Pi' had been written as people, and not animals, it would not have been nearly as satisfying.
This book did not make me believe in God, but it at least got me to be a little less skeptical about the stories within the Bible.





I was utterly shocked at the end when Pi told the story with people instead of the animals. I was completely horrified at that story and think it was for his own sanity that he changed the story to have animals. Part of me still wants to believe that it really did all occur with the animals though.
I much preferred the 'animal story' though that emphasized resourcefulness and bravery rather than the 'human story' that depicted absolute savagery.




While I was reading it I felt that the author was somewhat detached from Pi himself. And that I didn't like. But as I read on, I really started thinking about my own perspective on life, how do I live it, what would I do in his situation, would I just lay there and die, give in; or do all the things he did to survive? Hmmm....
When at the end he asks the Japanese men: "which story do you prefer?" I believe he's asking the reader: "How do YOU perceive life? Are you a pessimist, a romantic, an optimist? Would you rather be with humans, who very often act so inhumane, animalistic; or with a tiger, who is 'Less' intelligent, yet doesn't over think everything to a point of losing his purpose on Earth, his function?"
I'm being haunted by this book and that's already good.
P.S. So... Which one are you? Which story do you chose? I trust that they are both true depending on YOU, the human, the reader.
I sadly have to say that for me it's the second one, although I'm trying to believe (with all my might) that it's the first one. Because it's more romantic and well... "better"...

It really depends.
Those who have a specific faith, religious or atheistic (as Pi notes that he finds it to be its own faith), are likely to believe in the exaggerated, illogical, irrational story, the one with animals. An agnostic likely takes a more humane, logical story, the one with humans which is told dully in one chapter.
The entire book is designed in a way to give faith of some kind to the reader. The version with animals is incredible, not believable, but we like it better. Why? I dunno. It's more exciting. It was difficult to believe that the second story was the "real" events, as I believe most of you were initially.
The first story is likened to some kind of faith. True or not, doesn't matter. It colors life. Bible, Qoran, Vedas, atheism, whatever. The point is to have a faith, whatever risk. Pi uses the term "leap of faith,"- exciting, dramatic, dangerous, almost fun.
The agnostic is quite frankly at the core, scared to choose. They try to reason, but don't take sides. At the cliff, they never perform the leap of faith. They sit and miss the fun, simply because they demand evidence in something inherently shrouded in mystery and irrationallity, illogicality. Just like the number pi. It is the businessmen at the end of the book. demanding some rational explanation rather than having an imagination. Comparable to denying the existence of the quotient of 22/7 because you do not know the end of the number (see what I'm getting at?).
All in all, I would believe the first one, simply because, while not true, it is that leap of faith. In the same way, I was born and raised religiously, not to any real extent, but I keep my religion because I grew up that way. It doesn't play a huge part of my life, but after reading this book, the faith is... not stronger, but sturdier, simply because it's more enjoyable this way.
Nif's point, I agree with it. But the idea goes further than that, to an obvious connection with faith.
It really isn't a question of romanticness, or optimism, just faith, which is close but not really the same thing.
Maegan, if you read chapter 22 and then 7 (the most important chapters in the book, and 22/7... not creepy, but genius) then Pi explains his affinity for the atheistic "faith." I am not an atheist, but it is in its own right a way to believe. You go as far as reason takes you, then you jump. Thus, Piscine says that having faith of some form is key, rather than agnosticism, where one demands proof of something that inherently is without proof, "and miss the better story." Pi cannot prove to anyone his tale of survival, but one can simply believe the realistic facts, or be creative.

"Imagine that the author of your text has been invited to talk to a class group about their text. An interested student stands up and asks, “What message did you hope the reader would receive from your work? How did you hope to achieve this?” Talk about the response."
your help would be appreciated


I see the whole point is that it doesn't matter which one is "objectively true." The book is a rejection of realism. Much like those of us who try to grasp metaphysical questions (i.e. does God exist?), Pi's Japanese audience at the end of the book have no way of knowing which story is true. They have to accept it on faith either way. This is hinted at earlier in the book when Pi states that atheists "miss the better story" (i.e by not believing in God). You can believe the story with the people, and it is true that it reflects the "objective reality" of humankind's grim history. Or, you can take a leap of faith to believe something magical that doesn't leave you feeling empty and disgusted with humanity.

Finally someone said it was a construct. Pi assumed he was peace-loving and kind, but when the tiger slaughters the meercats with malicious pleasure, he can't deal with that side of himself, so he imagines a tiger doing it. I love the way Richard Parker always dogs Pi, like we struggle to shake off the darkness that invades our hearts and minds.
I didn't really think the author was trying to take sides on a religion. I think that showed that Pi also assumed he was open-minded, when really his instinct was to survive like everyone else. GOSH, I LOVED THIS BOOK!
I have the author's next one in my TBR list...
I didn't think either version was true.




It was an amazing book but I must confess that I didn't find his having all the different religions convincing. The Bible says that there is only one God and yet he believed in all the Hindu Gods aswell.
I'm not sure what to think about meerkat island...
:)

Thanks for your comment, Liz. I believe the author left the two versions for us to decide. The horrible story is most likely what happened in my opinion - it just makes more sense. The animal story was most likely imagined in order for him to cope with the tragedy and his long ordeal.
I personally loved all his religions - I'm agnostic, as believing in one religion discounts all others and says they are wrong (as far as I know, maybe some religions don't do that). He had all his bases covered - hah! Wonder if he took to Judaism, Buddhism and Jehovah Witness when he arrived in Canada - haha.
I read one essay online that interpreted meerkat island as eden. I, however, do not buy that. Perhaps he was dying and becoming comfortable with his death and discovered that it was dangerous, hence the teeth and snapped out of it to save his life...?
There are so many layers to this book - probably, someone familiar with religions would find more metaphors etc.

It was just heartbreaking. This story was amazing and I'm so glad I was given this book.


"I think there is no doubt that both stories are the same. That's why he asks the japanese man which one did he "prefer", not "believe". They are just two ways of seeing life. The realistic/pessimistic one, or the faithful one, filled with hopes and fantasy."
My take on the island is that it was a way for Pi's mind to reconcile what he had to do to survive. The island had to become deadly part of the time in order to sustain itself, just as Pi did. Pi was the tiger, but he was also the meerkats. And when Pi was safe, the tiger ran off because Pi didn't need to be him anymore.


I always ask students "Which story is true?" The kids who were already believers always raise their hands. Of curse it's true, we can get behind a story like that. The kids without faith tend to be relieved by the last five chapters, because they knew something was fishy all along.
All belief--or lack thereof--is based on story/myth. I thought that was the point of the book. We can adopt the myths we hear or make up new ones to suit our needs at the moment.



i so agree.

"Imagine that the author of your text has been invited to talk to a class group abo..."
if i had written the story i would have most wanted to convey what hopelessness looks like and the practiacalities that can see us through. thru pi's narration we can see not only his hopelessness but how he workds thru the practical aspects of how to both survive and overcome. in the end i would hope that people would understand that experience changes us. and as a side note i thru in the ending because there will always be people who cannot believe truth; it's best to take your cookies back from them and move on.

Just like when it comes to believe in any kind of religion.
All religious doctrines ultimately boil down to our salvation, be it in an eternal life or reincarnation etc... That is, the happy ending factor in real life which confirms our existence from not being actually futile and pointless.
But then again it does not have to mean that the story with the happy ending is actually the one with the ultimate truth.

As a 'devout Agnostic', I recoiled early in the text from the interviewer's premise that agnosticism equates to "dry, yeastless factuality" and "to choose doubt as a philosphy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation". On the contrary, what might be construed as "doubt" I view as philosophical flexibiity and open-mindedness. To engage the author's analogies, why travel a road "limited" by others' white and yellow lines or pavement (e.g., established religious doctrine) if a point beyond the horizon is the ultimate spiritual goal. And there probably is a place for unleavened bread on all tables. Not to mention facts...
The story is a spiritual coming-of-age tale. Was Pi's religious explorations teenage revolt of his father's agnosticism? Probably so... which leads me to believe the "better story with animals" could be his method of philosophical reconciliation with his father's beliefs. At first I thought the author intended the "first story" to represent known religious doctrines, but I've since changed my mind.
I'm comfortable that Richard Parker represented Pi (e.g., both had name issues; both departed without goodbye -- Pi from his father). The Frenchman? Maybe he represented the father as both stepped onto a marine vessel unaware that they would met death there. Pondicherry had been French; Pi's father was relocating his family to a French environment. And so, maybe his father's Agnosticism -- and by extension the Frenchman -- represented a dynamic that did not change for Pi, albeit both were "swallowed" by greater forces.
Any thoughts on what the various vessels represent?
The island was a moving 'vessel' as well representing Pi's spiritual challenge. Light (day) versus dark (night); life-giving abundance during daylight versus nighttime hellish acidity. Staying with the 'known' (organized religion) versus continued venture into the uncertain (ocean = Agnosticism?). Interesting that fish (Christianity icon) were one of two compelling food (for the soul?) devices (trapped in pools first alive then dead) along with Pi's observation that the island algae/foilage was the color of Islam (also both saving and killing).
Pi stated that his family's zoo had no meerkats, but he described at length the island's numbers, harmlessness and the "ceaseless noise" they made. Could the meerkats represent the multitudes of organized religions (and the three holy men who, as Pi described the meerkats, were adamently vocal and moved in "unity of their gestures" when all three encountered Pi with his family)?
Pi decided to leave the island's "ceaseless noise" and continue into the "unknown", ultimately finding a place in his father's French environment. Enroute there, Richard Parker departed, as well with no goodbye just as Pi had lost his father... and boyhood.


I agree ! That was less miserable !
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Басни (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
Life of Pi (other topics)Басни (other topics)