Life of Pi
discussion
Which version did you beleive?
date
newest »
newest »
message 201:
by
Cristine
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Mar 24, 2013 06:43AM
OR...why do some WANT to believe in the second story?! ! Not judging but just inquiring...
reply
|
flag
I definitely preferred the animal version. For me it was more insightful to human struggles and the tendency (again I can only speak for myself), with the second story, is that it seems like watching the news (people killing one another) and thus I would just take it at face value and not think more deeply on it, other than to feel sad. I like that he presented both stories, but visually with the animals. As we can see from this discussion here a 'one size fits all' version would not reach nearly as many folks! :)
Stephanie wrote: "I definitely preferred the animal version. For me it was more insightful to human struggles and the tendency (again I can only speak for myself), with the second story, is that it seems like watch..."Well said Stephanie;)
Several writers have interpreted the story so well, there is hardly anything to add to it. The act of "believing" one story of the other is precisely what the author has us thinking is the point. Believing stories is central to, not only religion, but also to humankind's emotional needs. Our survival, our ability to live in a too-often brutal world is dependent on our being able to distance ourselves from raw and hurtful truths. I don't think we need to "choose" one story to believe -- if we do, we are making a decision that might very well be fictional. I think the author made it quite clear.
Pi asks "which version do you PREFER". I believe both stories are true. One describes his PHYSICAL experience of evil, self-condemnation, grief & despair. Pi described the chef as "an evil man who brought out the evil in me", & he said, "you'll never know what you're capable of until you're really hungry". The other story describes his SPIRITUAL journey of faith, protection, provision, forgiveness, hope & rescue. Pi said, You'll never know the strength of your faith until it's been tested". His faith in God gave him the strength to survive, live with himself, forgive himself, leave the past behind & move on to live a happy, fulfilling life. Pi's mother told him that science tells us about the world, but religion tells us about the heart. I like to think that Pi gained an understanding of the gospel when he experienced forgiveness.
Pi asks "which version do you PREFER". I believe both stories are true. One describes his PHYSICAL experience of evil, self-condemnation, grief & despair. Pi described the chef as "an evil man who brought out the evil in me", & he said, "you'll never know what you're capable of until you're really hungry". The other story describes his SPIRITUAL journey of faith, protection, provision, forgiveness, hope & rescue. Pi said, You'll never know the strength of your faith until it's been tested". His faith in God gave him the strength to survive, live with himself, forgive himself, leave the past behind & move on to live a happy, fulfilling life. Pi's mother told him that science tells us about the world, but religion tells us about the heart. I like to think that Pi gained an understanding of the gospel when he experienced forgiveness.
I disagree with the majority. I think the tiger story was the true one. I agree with it because, well, I can't really explain it, but after I watched it I just feel like like the impossible was meant to happen to him. I also believe that he saw his family in the events that happened with the animals, but it was the animals. I choose God.
I also wonder if God was not supposed to be Richard Parker. He protected Pi in his own way (Killing the Hyena) And he never actually hurt him. In fact, he made Pi stronger. He gave Pi a reason to survive-He gave him companionship. Also, he left Pi in the end because he knew Pi was safe and no longer needed him. He didn't look back because God never truly looks away in the first place.
I believe the one with the tiger.
I would love to believe the one with the tiger, but sadly, we all know it's the other version :(
I believe the story with Bengal Tiger in it :3
Floramanda wrote: "This has been a popular Book Club book, but my club hasn't read it yet. I'm curious what other readers have thought about the two alternate versions of Pi's life on the boat. Which version did you ..."i liked the story with the animals best and i already believed in God.
Like most people on here, I prefer the first story, but I think the second story is the truth. Pi's relationship with Richard Parker was the most interesting part to me because it I think it explains a transitioning point in Pi's spiritual views. We know that Pi gives himself two characters in the first story; he is both the Richard Parker and himself. Richard Parker is an animal and is, therefore, only interested in survival. I think this represents a hedonistic part of Pi that he didn't realize existed until he killed the cook.
However, he also recognizes that there is a part of him that isn't completely hedonistic like Richard Parker. To survive he needs both parts of himself: the hedonistic animal side of himself in order to survive physically, and the deeper part of himself (his soul) that he needs to keep hope and to survive spiritually. I think the parts where he is training Richard Parker in the first story represent his efforts to control the animal-like side of himself.
For anyone, especially someone who is spiritual, it is difficult to accept that humans can be savage and hedonistic. The first story is more appealing to most of us because the second story is brutal and savage. For Pi, however, I think the two stories are the same. He recognizes the first story as the literal truth, but the second story is what teaches us about his spiritual journey and the insights he gained.
I believed in God before, but I really liked the way I felt the story represented the challenge of understanding humanity and spirituality.
I believe the second story sadly because I am a very realistic person but I like to imagine the first story being true because it is quite amazing and well-sculpted.
The question aint which story is the real one the question isWhich story you believe in, if you believe in life there
Can be miracles you have faith believe in god and all
That then you believe in the animal story , but if you say things
Like that don happen in life its all about reality and things like that just dnt happen then you believe in the the secound one.
The life of pi dont leave you with a deffenetive answer
He leaves that up to you.
Christina Stind wrote: "It reminded me of an episode of Mash - towards the end, the main character Hawkeye goes crazy and nobody know why. He keeps telling a story of how they were all hiding in a bus and a woman had a he..."Christina, I remember that episode and think you are spot on!
this is the best book i have ever read and i also saw the movie in 3d and it was also awesome i read the book first then see the movie there were a few changes though
Jon wrote: "The question aint which story is the real one the question is
Which story you believe in, if you believe in life there
Can be miracles you have faith believe in god and all
That then you believe i..."
Yes ! Exactly !
Which story you believe in, if you believe in life there
Can be miracles you have faith believe in god and all
That then you believe i..."
Yes ! Exactly !
That's why Martel is such a gifted writer -- to pull that choice off in one book? Genius!
I would like to believe the story that was narrated throughout the book,that is before Pi was questioned by the Japanese guys...there is so much adventure,so much thrill in that story!!!
I never believed the second version, only the first. Why? I don't really know, probably because I just liked it better. And I think I didn't change my mind after reading the 2nd story because that is what 'believing' is. Just like people (and Pi!) believe in God, nobody knows which story is true. I believe the first story no matter how true the 2nd one is :)
It really depends on if you are an insurance adjuster or not...
The latest Dodge Challenger is blooming afterwards its big brother’s 1970s flair. Just like pony cars are declared to look, the Challenger has a beneath fastback roof band contour and an continued hood. However, down under, it is based on an abridged adjustment of the Dodge Charger’s platformhttp://www.idealobd.de/renault-peugeo.... With advanced
adaptation and a breach folding rear accommodationBMW GT1 , the Dodge Challenger has arresting accoutrements amplitude and abounding commuter room.
@link-xy
This book was rather boring, and it really shoves religion down your throat, as an atheist, the story is lacking they feed you with a b.s. story for such a long period of time, when the human story is clearly "what happened."
As people talk about these two stories, they seem to see them as seperate and noncoexistent, as if it is a matter of choosing one over the other. Yet this seems to directly oppose Pi's own beliefs. In the first chapters we learn of how Pi practices three different religions, all of which have different stories and figures and seem in no way to be compatable with one another. Somehow though, Pi understands that though each religion tells different tales, they can still all be true and have the same over-reaching idea.
In this same way, can it not be that what Pi feels about the two versions of his story is similar to the three different religions? Different in characters and names, but able to be viewed as coexisting, with not only one as the truth, but both, in each their different way? As with the religions, both are accepted because both tell the same idea, and it is this idea that makes them so significant.
If the first was true, whatever happened to Richard Parker. Mexican authorities would have been alerted to a Bengali tiger in their midst.Nevertheless, I do believe the first story to be the true one. Its a matter of faith of which I wish to believe, I readily admit.
I loved the book and loved the movie. The relationship between Pi and Richard Parker is intelligent, clever and inspiring. It forces you to look inside yourself, draw on your faith and rely on yourself in times of challenge.
I recognize the second story as what actually happened (had the story been non-fiction) Pi did not want to think of himself as a monster or have the world know he had eaten human flesh. His imagination recreated his voyage; a pretty story so he could deny accountability for his actions.
Floramanda wrote: "This has been a popular Book Club book, but my club hasn't read it yet. I'm curious what other readers have thought about the two alternate versions of Pi's life on the boat. Which version did you ...""Did this book make you believe in God?"
No. It entrenched my opinion that religions are disharmonious of one another. It also entrenched my opinion that superstition provides comfort to those who have been traumatised such as Pi. This says nothing about truth, only that superstition or belief in gods and miracles can provide comfort.
I think this is an appealing book in theory, as it is seemingly very parablesque or Aesopian, but the end result is preachy and advocates faith in a very suffocating and ham-fisted way. Even more-so in the film.
The second story sickened me. While I read it, I continuously thought I was going to vomit. The second story seems more likely, but the first story has so many details, it seems believable. It is a toss-up, but I think Pi made up the first story to feel better and he eventually convinced himself it was true.
This discussion thread makes me so sad. So many people here chose the second story. As a writer and a human being, that just makes me sad.
Simon wrote: "This discussion thread makes me so sad. So many people here chose the second story. As a writer and a human being, that just makes me sad."If there was a like button on your comment I'd press it :)
I think the second story, Orange Juice was his mother, the zebra was the sailor, the cook was the hyena, and Richard Parker was Pi's imagination. Did you notice that Richard Parker showed up just when the hyena (cook) died? Pi didn't want to be alone, so his mind made up Richard Parker to soothe him. A 450 lb. adult Bengal Tiger would not pass off a human for some foreign unknown fish. Pi went blind as Richard Parker went blind. At the very end Pi tells the interviewers that they won't find Richard Parker, he is gone somewhere far away... in his mind. When Richard Parker went into the woods, he went back in Pi's mind. Yes, the animal story sounds better, but the people story is more believable (for me).
Floramanda wrote: "This has been a popular Book Club book, but my club hasn't read it yet. I'm curious what other readers have thought about the two alternate versions of Pi's life on the boat. Which version did you ..."I'm pretty sure it makes no sense which one is true. Remember Akutagawa's In a Grove. Or - just to be closer to real life - any discussion or debate you've ever conducted. Every single man has his only vision of a certain situation, has "a truth" of his own. These two stories are neither true nor wrong. It's up to you to choose the one you accept & believe. They're both parts of the process. And it's really doesn't matter what Martel is telling about - either humans or animals. This is merely one story about life. As for me I took both of the versions simultaneously.
I actually think that the animal story is true, because I think that Pi made up the second story when the Japanese men wouldn't believe the animal one. He told the animal one, and they didn't believe him, so he came up with basically the same story but with people instead of animals to appease the Japanese men. When he says 'which do you prefer', he's telling them to choose whatever satisfies them because they don't believe the true story. I think everyone who picks the human story is overthinking this fictional work. There are too many things that don't match up between the animal story and the human story for the human story to be the true story.
The first version. Mainly because I love the floating meerkat island.
After reading the book for a second time, I am all the more convinced that the first story is the "true" one for several reasons. For one, had he invented the first story, Richard Parker would have turned back for one last look at Pi before entering the jungle. Richard Parker's not looking back was so disturbing to him, he never would have put it into a fictional tale. Secondly, had he been using the first story to cover up the harsh and horrific realities of his experience in the second story, he would have invented a much more convincing, and most likely dull, story (much like the second story). He would not have made up a floating island and a bengal tiger and expected anyone to believe it. Also, the second story didn't provide an explanation as to how his mother survived the sinking ship while his father and Ravi did not when all 3 were sleeping and trapped in the same cabin and would have suffered the same fate. I also don't believe it was in Pi's nature to murder the French cook--in self-defense maybe--but not as he described it. (He had a hard enough time killing his first fish). Too many inconsistencies in the second story make it seem unlikely.
And finally, I do think Pi would have given up had he been all alone. It was his compassion for the tiger and keeping it from starving that gave him sufficient purpose and will to survive and do whatever it took to keep them both alive. Remember the tiger was a zoo animal, accustomed to being fed by humans, and while not tame and deserving the respect and wide berth Pi gave it, I found it a very believable scenario (all except that carnivorous island, but the book is fiction after all).
Despite the miracles, or maybe because of them, I still find the first story to be more compelling and more likely to reflect Pi's reality, because more often than not, reality is not what we expect it to be.
I want to believe the first story, but then who did the 'brother' confess to killing, when Pi was blinded? And he still resorted to cannibalism in both tales.
Floramanda wrote: "This has been a popular Book Club book, but my club hasn't read it yet. I'm curious what other readers have thought about the two alternate versions of Pi's life on the boat. Which version did you ..."I believed the animal version. And the book was more likely to make me loose faith in God ranter than believe in God.
I think the animal version is real, and he told the human version to please the journalists.
It' s make-believe anyway so I'll stay with the Tiger and carnivourous algae story. Why not? Stories are meant to be an escape from reality anyway.
To quote the movie "I like the one with the tiger."
I never saw the movie.And I found the ending of the book underwhelming, to say the least.
He would have been better off ending it on the island and leave the readers to sort out the resolution.
The real story was obviously the real story, but it wouldn't have made a book.
You should go see it, it's one of the best movies I've seen and totally makes up for the book's ending.
Pass. Movies rarely match the book, and in this case that would make the movie 1 star.
It's actually a very good adaptation, but I get it.
o-o I liked the movie more than the book ('cept I watched the movie first so that could make a difference).
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Life of Pi (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
Басни (other topics)Life of Pi (other topics)
