|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jun 20, 2012 18:06:54 GMT -5
Got more topics for suggested discussion, sacerdotal? If not, do others? Trust me, you don't wanna turn ME loose yet with all the discussion questions roaming around in my head.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Jun 20, 2012 19:40:07 GMT -5
I am interested in some of the passages that people found particularly interesting or moving. Here are a few of my “favs”:
-Chapter 4: I wish I could convey the perfection of a seal slipping into water or a spider monkey swinging from point to point or a lion merely turning its head. But language founders in such seas. Better to picture it in your head if you want to feel it.
-End of Chapter 7: If Christ spent an anguished night in prayer, if He burst out from the Cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” then surely we are also permitted doubt. But we must move on. To choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation.
Chapter 14: It is interesting to note that the lion that is the most amenable to the circus trainer’s tricks is the one with the lowest social standing in the pride, the omega animal. It has the most to gain from a close relationship with the super-alpha trainer.
Chapter 37: In that case, what is the purpose of reason, Richard Parker? Is it no more than to shine at practicalities – the getting of food, clothing and shelter? Why can’t reason give greater answers? Why can we throw a question further than we can pull in an answer? Why such a vast net if there’s so little fish to catch?”
End of Chapter 46: Where Pi acknowledges the death of his family and compares each member of his family to a tree.
Chapter 56: Which I still think is one of the most compelling and palpable descriptions of fear that I have ever seen.
Chapter 60: For the first time I noticed – as I would notice repeatedly during my ordeal, between one throe of agony and the next – that my suffering was taking place in a grand setting. I saw my suffering for what it was, finite and insignificant, and I was still. My suffering did not fit anywhere, I realized. And I could accept this. It was all right.
Chapter 74: (speaking of religious rituals) They brought me comfort, that is certain. But it was hard, oh, it was hard. Faith in God is an opening up, a letting go, a deep trust, a free act of love – but sometimes it was so hard to love. Sometimes my heart was sinking so fast with anger, desolation and weariness …..
The blackness would stir and eventually go away, and God would remain, a shining point of light in my heart. I would go on loving.
End of Chapter 85: At moments of wonder, it is easy to avoid small thinking, to entertain thoughts that span the universe, that capture both thunder and tinkle, thick and thin, the near and the far.
Chapter 94: It’s important in life to conclude things properly. Only then can you let go.
Chapter 99: The world isn’t just the way 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?
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jun 20, 2012 22:00:05 GMT -5
I am interested in some of the passages that people found particularly interesting or moving. Here are a few of my “favs”: -Chapter 4: I wish I could convey the perfection of a seal slipping into water or a spider monkey swinging from point to point or a lion merely turning its head. But language founders in such seas. Better to picture it in your head if you want to feel it. -End of Chapter 7: If Christ spent an anguished night in prayer, if He burst out from the Cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” then surely we are also permitted doubt. But we must move on. To choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation. Chapter 14: It is interesting to note that the lion that is the most amenable to the circus trainer’s tricks is the one with the lowest social standing in the pride, the omega animal. It has the most to gain from a close relationship with the super-alpha trainer. Chapter 37: In that case, what is the purpose of reason, Richard Parker? Is it no more than to shine at practicalities – the getting of food, clothing and shelter? Why can’t reason give greater answers? Why can we throw a question further than we can pull in an answer? Why such a vast net if there’s so little fish to catch?” End of Chapter 46: Where Pi acknowledges the death of his family and compares each member of his family to a tree.
Chapter 56: Which I still think is one of the most compelling and palpable descriptions of fear that I have ever seen.Chapter 60: For the first time I noticed – as I would notice repeatedly during my ordeal, between one throe of agony and the next – that my suffering was taking place in a grand setting. I saw my suffering for what it was, finite and insignificant, and I was still. My suffering did not fit anywhere, I realized. And I could accept this. It was all right. Chapter 74: (speaking of religious rituals) They brought me comfort, that is certain. But it was hard, oh, it was hard. Faith in God is an opening up, a letting go, a deep trust, a free act of love – but sometimes it was so hard to love. Sometimes my heart was sinking so fast with anger, desolation and weariness ….. The blackness would stir and eventually go away, and God would remain, a shining point of light in my heart. I would go on loving. End of Chapter 85: At moments of wonder, it is easy to avoid small thinking, to entertain thoughts that span the universe, that capture both thunder and tinkle, thick and thin, the near and the far. Chapter 94: It’s important in life to conclude things properly. Only then can you let go. Chapter 99: The world isn’t just the way 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? Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant! I think that I had most of those passages highlighted in my book as well. The turn of phrase that the author used throughout the book is nothing short of genius. I'm delighted to see that we had highlighted the same verses. I think that speaks of the universal ism of the message. A few other passages that I highlighted (up to chapter 30) I'll post more later: In zoos, as in nature, the best times to visit are sunrise and sunset. That is when most animals come to life. They stir and leave their shelter and tiptoe to the water's edge. They show their raiments. They sing their songs. They turn to each other and perform their rites. The reward for the watching eye and the listening ear is great. I spent more hours than I can count a quiet witness to the highly mannered, manifold expressions of life that grace our planet. It is something so bright, loud, weird and delicate as to stupefy the senses.
----- In a zoo, if an animal is not in its normal place in its regular posture at the usual hour, it means something.
( <-- I had highlighted this verse because it also means something when my kids are not in their usual place at an appointed time.) ------ I know zoos are no longer in people's good graces. Religion faces the same problem. Certain illusions about freedom plague them both.----- It was my luck to have a few good teachers in my youth, men and women who came into my dark head and lit a match.----- This was all a bit much for me. The tone was right— loving and brave— but the details seemed bleak. I said nothing. It wasn't for fear of angering Mr. Kumar. I was more afraid that in a few words thrown out he might destroy something that I loved. What if his words had the effect of polio on me? What a terrible disease that must be if it could kill God in a man.
----- But divinity should not be blighted by death. It's wrong. The world soul cannot die, even in one contained part of it. It was wrong of this Christian God to let His avatar die. That is tantamount to letting a part of Himself die. For if the Son is to die, it cannot be fake. If God on the Cross is God shamming a human tragedy, it turns the Passion of Christ into the Farce of Christ. The death of the Son must be real. Father Martin assured me that it was. But once a dead God, always a dead God, even resurrected. The Son must have the taste of death forever in His mouth. The Trinity must be tainted by it; there must be a certain stench at the right hand of God the Father. The horror must be real. Why would God wish that upon Himself ? Why not leave death to the mortals? Why make dirty what is beautiful, spoil what is perfect?
Love. That was Father Martin's answer.
----- The mid-1970s were troubled times in India. I gathered that from the deep furrows that appeared on Father's forehead when he read the papers. Or from snippets of conversation that I caught between him and Mother and Mamaji and others. It's not that I didn't understand the drift of what they said— it's that I wasn't interested. The orang-utans were as eager for chapattis as ever; the monkeys never asked after the news from Delhi; the rhinos and goats continued to live in peace; the birds twittered; the clouds carried rain; the sun was hot; the earth breathed; God was— there was no Emergency in my world.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jun 20, 2012 22:00:38 GMT -5
Got more topics for suggested discussion, sacerdotal? If not, do others? Trust me, you don't wanna turn ME loose yet with all the discussion questions roaming around in my head. Go for it, DC. I look forward to it!
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jun 20, 2012 22:01:51 GMT -5
I keep hoping someone will throw some light on the alternate ending & why he wrote that! I'm completely stymied! I have a theory on the ending. But I am stumped as to the meaning of the island as well.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jun 20, 2012 22:05:52 GMT -5
In an earlier post I mentioned that "The Life of Pi" had given me a different perspective on fear. I thought that the description of fear in Chapter 56 was excellent. Did anyone else have a similar reaction as they read through that chapter? I would be interested in how others deal with the "wordless darkness". The issue seems particularly relevent here on TMB because of the frequent references to the "fear of going to hell" expressed by many. Would be interested in others experiences. I think that that chapter is one of the greatest sections of literature that I have ever read. It is a true masterpiece. It begins like this: I must say a word about fear. It is life's only true opponent. Only fear can defeat life. It is a clever, treacherous adversary, how well I know. It has no decency, respects no law or convention, shows no mercy. It goes for your weakest spot, which it finds with unerring ease. It begins in your mind, always. One moment you are feeling calm, self-possessed, happy. Then fear, disguised in the garb of mild-mannered doubt, slips into your mind like a spy. Doubt meets disbelief and disbelief tries to push it out. But disbelief is a poorly armed foot soldier. Doubt does away with it with little trouble. You become anxious. Reason comes to do battle for you. You are reassured. Reason is fully equipped with the latest weapons technology. But, to your amazement, despite superior tactics and a number of undeniable victories, reason is laid low. You feel yourself weakening, wavering. Your anxiety becomes dread.
Pure genius.
|
|
|
Post by ScholarGal on Jun 20, 2012 23:00:19 GMT -5
I keep hoping someone will throw some light on the alternate ending & why he wrote that! I'm completely stymied! I have a theory on the ending. But I am stumped as to the meaning of the island as well. My first theory about the island went along with my first reading of the book (when I still thought the author's notes were nonfiction and preferred the alternate ending's description of events). Just before the island episode, Pi's lifeboat encountered another lifeboat while his vision was impaired by malnutrition. Perhaps the island episode was a hallucination triggered by malnutrition, or the stress of the demise of the other lifeboat's occupant.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jun 21, 2012 3:23:22 GMT -5
I agree with others that portions of the book border on genius. I, too, liked a lot of the quotes yknot and sacerdotal mentioned. I'll add just one colorful picture, which highlights for me an example of why this was a fun book to read:
Accidental cannibalism is a common occurrence during the excitement of a feeding; in reaching for a bite of zebra, a hyena will take in the ear or nostril of a clan member, no hard feelings intended. The hyena feels no disgust at this mistake. Its delights are too many to admit to disgust at anything.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jun 21, 2012 3:51:21 GMT -5
All right, then, let's open the can of worms. Opinions coming, discussion welcome. "You want a story without animals." "Yes!" "Without tigers or orang-utans." "That's right." ... "Without giraffes or hippopotamuses." "We will plug our ears with our fingers!"
So Pi tells the truth. "Is that better? Are there any parts you find hard to believe? Anything you'd like me to change?" Mr. Chiba: "What a horrible story."
IMO, it's a bit misleading to see the ending as an "alternate." We get to the end and Pi admits that this was never a story about animals. It was about people all along. His postmodern message seems to be, "why would you care to know the banal TRUTH? Quit digging, or you'll ruin my story! Ok, ok, it was people in the boat with me, killing and eating each other, do you really feel any better now? Don't you wish you'd never pressed me about truth? Wasn't it a lot nicer story with animals?" Mr. Okamoto: "Yes. The story with animals is the better story." Pi Patel: "Thank you. And so it goes with God."
Aha! So, finally, 424 pages into the book, we finally find God. He is a fanciful story which makes life palatable, and hides the ugliness of who we are. God is beautiful, majestic! Who cares if he's pretend? Truth is relative. And the unenlightened investigators are determined to make Pi throw it away and sink to the unforgiving facts. All because they can't believe in the impossible. "If you stumble at mere believability, what are you living for?"Did Pi finally get through to them? He tried until the very end to help them out: Pi Patel: "Would you like some cookies for the road?" Mr. Okamota: "That would be nice." "Here, have three each." "Thank you." Mr. Chiba: "Thank you." "You're welcome. Goodbye. God be with you, my brothers." "Thank you. And with you too, Mr. Patel."
Think all this politeness is just Martel's writing style? No, this kindness and sharing is meant to contrast the ugliness of the story. Pi found God. Or else, he found the ugliness of TRUTH, and preferred to shelter others. I laughed for an hour at the irony of how the book ends. As they part... Mr. Okamoto: "I'm starving. Let's go eat."
Now, if you accept any of the above... what about those meerkat bones they found in the boat?lol...fascinating book.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jun 21, 2012 4:23:44 GMT -5
I wanna call attention to one more passage, without commentary...except this reminder: The whole story is the battle to keep Richard Parker, the tiger, under control. The investigators have done the math, and figured out that Pi is the tiger. After Pi says "and so it goes with God," the book continues:
Mr. Chiba: "What did he just say?" Mr. Okamoto: "I don't know." Mr. Chiba: "Oh, look--he's crying." [Long silence] Mr. Okamoto: "We'll be careful when we drive away. We don't want to run into Richard Parker." Pi Patel: "Don't worry, you wont. He's hiding somewhere you'll never find him."
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jun 21, 2012 9:38:00 GMT -5
All right, then, let's open the can of worms. Opinions coming, discussion welcome. "You want a story without animals." "Yes!" "Without tigers or orang-utans." "That's right." ... "Without giraffes or hippopotamuses." "We will plug our ears with our fingers!"
So Pi tells the truth. "Is that better? Are there any parts you find hard to believe? Anything you'd like me to change?" Mr. Chiba: "What a horrible story."
IMO, it's a bit misleading to see the ending as an "alternate." We get to the end and Pi admits that this was never a story about animals. It was about people all along. His postmodern message seems to be, "why would you care to know the banal TRUTH? Quit digging, or you'll ruin my story! Ok, ok, it was people in the boat with me, killing and eating each other, do you really feel any better now? Don't you wish you'd never pressed me about truth? Wasn't it a lot nicer story with animals?" Mr. Okamoto: "Yes. The story with animals is the better story." Pi Patel: "Thank you. And so it goes with God."
Aha! So, finally, 424 pages into the book, we finally find God. He is a fanciful story which makes life palatable, and hides the ugliness of who we are. God is beautiful, majestic! Who cares if he's pretend? Truth is relative. And the unenlightened investigators are determined to make Pi throw it away and sink to the unforgiving facts. All because they can't believe in the impossible. "If you stumble at mere believability, what are you living for?"Did Pi finally get through to them? He tried until the very end to help them out: Pi Patel: "Would you like some cookies for the road?" Mr. Okamota: "That would be nice." "Here, have three each." "Thank you." Mr. Chiba: "Thank you." "You're welcome. Goodbye. God be with you, my brothers." "Thank you. And with you too, Mr. Patel."
Think all this politeness is just Martel's writing style? No, this kindness and sharing is meant to contrast the ugliness of the story. Pi found God. Or else, he found the ugliness of TRUTH, and preferred to shelter others. I laughed for an hour at the irony of how the book ends. As they part... Mr. Okamoto: "I'm starving. Let's go eat."
Now, if you accept any of the above... what about those meerkat bones they found in the boat?lol...fascinating book. Great observation, DC. You nailed it. In life we have to choose a filter as to how we interpret it (simplified list): * agnostic * atheist (rational mind) * spiritual * combination (this is me- rational/spiritual) The story with the animals is the better story.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jun 21, 2012 9:49:21 GMT -5
Japanese Translation
I may be reading too much into it, but I thought that it was interesting that the author noted that the notes on the sinking of the ship were translated from Japanese.
It was also interesting to note that one of the Japanese men had a difficult time understanding one of Pi's choice of words:
"How can I be calm? You should have seen Richard Parker!""Yes, yes"
"Huge. Teeth like this! Claws like scimitars!"
Mr. Chiba: "What are scimitars?"
It caused me to think of the difficulties that we face in reading the bible about the accounts of folks from thousands of years ago, who spoke a different language and had different customs. We apply the filters of our understanding to their behaviors, dress, motives, etc. We are making educated guesses about many things.
So, like Mr. Chiba, we read (hear) a simple account about a description of a tiger, and we wind up asking "what are scimitars?" Sometimes, things really are lost in the translation. The use of idioms is another example. Without the context of the time, the idiom may not ever make sense.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Jun 21, 2012 12:17:28 GMT -5
Now, if you accept any of the above... what about those meerkat bones they found in the boat?lol...fascinating book. This is probably a reach, but I think that they represent dinosaur bones and the mystery surrounding prehistoric life. Pi asked one of the investigators how the Meerkat bones got into the lifeboat. The investigator had to admit that he did not know. There is a lot even in science that we do not truly know or understand. Christians have a tough time explaining dinosaur bones as well.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jun 21, 2012 15:36:29 GMT -5
Dinosaur bones! Now THAT didn't occur to me!
I confess, I am baffled by the island. It's obviously paradise, Eden. The big tree on the island is the tree of life, or the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, or both (some readers of the Bible think--like Revelation says--there is only one tree, they are the same). These bones came from the island, the really "supernatural" part of the story. Is the island giving us hints about the true nature of God? God can't be a life-sucking, survival-of-the-fittest, primal force, can He? Ugh!!! Help!
And I just KNOW the truth of God is tied to those dang cookies at the end. Pi is hoarding the cookies, taking everything he can, still in survival mode. Then he admits the animals are humans. Then he breaks down and cries. Then he promises "you'll never see Richard Parker again." Then he gives the cookies back in bunches, underscoring his promise.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Jun 21, 2012 18:43:02 GMT -5
Why do I always feel like the last Romantic standing in this horrid world of Post-modernism? Post-modernism is the bane of all I hold dear; truth, love, honor and justice! I loathe Post-modernism!
Boy that felt good! Now, back to the story . . . . . I am in the other corner (opposite DD and sacerdotal).
When I finished the book, I set it aside and said to myself what a perfect book for starting a TMB discussion group! I was able to answer the OP strongly in the affirmative. The description of Pi talking to the Japanese investigators is precisely the same as posting to a thread on TMB, the audience wants to hear what they already believe.
I am going against what appears to be a consensus. In a work of fiction, I have absolutely no problem with the floating island. As I have been known to say . . . . . yknot?
“Rafting” on floating masses of vegetation has long been a theory commanding serious scientific consideration as a possible explanation for the transport of land species between continents and islands. It is one of the major explanations for the transport of land animals from Africa to Madagascar. Interestingly, meerkats are members of the mongoose family that some argue may have reached Madagascar on floating masses of vegetation. Natural islands of floating vegetation are relatively common in lakes in the Northern part of Mexico.
No, I take the position that the “true” story was the story told through the first 94+ chapters. Life is a journey of experiences that each person takes alone. One can tell others of their journey, but no other person can ever experience life as you have experienced it.
Pi tried to share his experiences and the faith that sustained him. But the investigators (inquisitors?) needed instead to hear their own beliefs confirmed from his lips. He complied. And why not, he had told them what happened, they rejected him, with compassion he met their need and maintained his own convictions. What would any of us do differently?
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Jun 21, 2012 19:10:52 GMT -5
Dinosaur bones! Now THAT didn't occur to me! I confess, I am baffled by the island. It's obviously paradise, Eden. The big tree on the island is the tree of life, or the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, or both (some readers of the Bible think--like Revelation says--there is only one tree, they are the same). These bones came from the island, the really "supernatural" part of the story. Is the island giving us hints about the true nature of God? God can't be a life-sucking, survival-of-the-fittest, primal force, can He? Ugh!!! Help! And I just KNOW the truth of God is tied to those dang cookies at the end. Pi is hoarding the cookies, taking everything he can, still in survival mode. Then he admits the animals are humans. Then he breaks down and cries. Then he promises "you'll never see Richard Parker again." Then he gives the cookies back in bunches, underscoring his promise. Can't say the idea of dinosaur bones ever crossed my mind either. Interesting idea. It seems to me, however, that the allegory of the floating island is sufficient within itself. Neat idea thinking of the floating island as Eden. My interpretation of the island carrying elements of creation from place to place would be consistent with that model and the idea of the dinosaur bones mentioned by sacerdotal. DD, you suprise me . . . . . "Is the island giving us hints about the true nature of God?" Of course it is! The island appears when Pi and Richard Parker need it the most. It provides hope and sustenance. Is this not part of the true nature of God (for true believers)? And you say: "And I just KNOW the truth of God is tied to those dang cookies at the end." But of course! Recall - "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." Those dang cookies represent Pi's very life (having been so long without adequate food) and yet he is willing to give them up to strangers. Is not such love also the true nature of God (for those who believe)?
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jun 21, 2012 21:10:26 GMT -5
What a fun book.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 21, 2012 21:37:17 GMT -5
What a fun book. so many great thoughts! I don't know where to begin. Yawn...I'll start tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Jun 22, 2012 17:26:14 GMT -5
No, I take the position that the “true” story was the story told through the first 94+ chapters. Life is a journey of experiences that each person takes alone. One can tell others of their journey, but no other person can ever experience life as you have experienced it. Pi tried to share his experiences and the faith that sustained him. But the investigators (inquisitors?) needed instead to hear their own beliefs confirmed from his lips. He complied. And why not, he had told them what happened, they rejected him, with compassion he met their need and maintained his own convictions. What would any of us do differently? I'm just now reading through some of the comments on the book, and my initial response is akin to yknots, I believe. As I read the book, it repeatedly struck me as the story of life, "true" in its relevance for a person coping with the fears of the ego, though perhaps not "true" in the relating of banal "facts." The island struck me as a seeming paradise, with everything provided, but which only brought certain death. Pi was safer in the "uncertainty" of the lifeboat with Richard Parker. As Pi mentioned early in the story, RP became his safety, heightening his awareness. This to me closely follows eastern teachings of the ego, fears, awareness, and such . . . and I see no contradcition with Jesus' teachings about "self." I appreciate the views others have expressed, and am by no means holding mine to be "correct." A genius of an author!
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Jun 24, 2012 14:36:24 GMT -5
Good (East Coast - North America) Afternoon to All!
Have been wondering about the pace of discussion.
Have not previously participated in an on-line book club, is this a typical pace for the conversation?
As I check in for new ideas and interpretations and discussion points about the book, I find myself drifting over to the main board where I invariably get myself into hot water. ;D
Thoughts? Comments?
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Jun 24, 2012 15:13:38 GMT -5
This format is a little new to me as well, yknot, we're learning as we go. Other book clubs that I've participated in usually have a discussion after every few chapters...we've chosen to read the entire book first, then discuss.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 24, 2012 19:57:41 GMT -5
What a fun book. so many great thoughts! I don't know where to begin. Yawn...I'll start tomorrow. I still hardly where to begin. Everyone seems to have so much better ideas than mine. I felt the first narration was the true one(as incredible as it seemed at times) - that the second narration that Pi gave to the investigaters was because they simply wouldn't believe his first one. Of course it is possible that the second one was just too horrible for Pi think about at first as it involved his mother being killed by the cook, then Pi killing the cook. He said the cook was "such an evil man" (in an effort to rationalize his own actions?) but then, comming to terms with his own self said, "Worse still, he met evil in me-selfishness, anger, ruthlessness. I must live with that." echoing something that we ourselves must often do when we are honest with ourselves. Could this, in a nut shell, be the reason he invented (if he did)the first long narrative? to escape the consquences of what he had done?
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Jun 24, 2012 20:34:35 GMT -5
Could this, in a nut shell, be the reason he invented (if he did)the first long narrative? to escape the consquences of what he had done? Your interpretation makes a lot of sense to me, dmmichgood. And it turns the book into more of a physchological drama rather than a spiritual drama. The one hesitancy I would have would be from a publishing perspective. A couple of years before Life of Pi came out, Nathanial Philbrick had published a non-fiction account of the sinking of the whaleship Essex (the sinking of the Essex by a whale was the basis for Melville's Moby Dick). Philbrick's book details the survival of the crew in rather gruesome detail based on diaries etc. I just wonder if Martel would publish yet another fictional book of man's cruelty to man at sea, all be it with a novel and interesting twist? Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 24, 2012 21:40:14 GMT -5
Another clue that the 2nd narative might be the true one is when Mr. Okamoto says,
" We'll be careful when we drive away. We don't want to run into Richard Parker."
( I think he is probably making a joke because he really doesn't believe there was a Richard Parker)
However, Pi says, "Don't worry, you won't. He's hiding somewhere you'll never find him."
I think Pi is saying in essence- that Richard Parker is hiding in plain sight- because he is you and I.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 26, 2012 1:04:37 GMT -5
Could this, in a nut shell, be the reason he invented (if he did)the first long narrative? to escape the consquences of what he had done? Your interpretation makes a lot of sense to me, dmmichgood. And it turns the book into more of a physchological drama rather than a spiritual drama. The one hesitancy I would have would be from a publishing perspective. A couple of years before Life of Pi came out, Nathanial Philbrick had published a non-fiction account of the sinking of the whaleship Essex (the sinking of the Essex by a whale was the basis for Melville's Moby Dick). Philbrick's book details the survival of the crew in rather gruesome detail based on diaries etc. I just wonder if Martel would publish yet another fictional book of man's cruelty to man at sea, all be it with a novel and interesting twist? Just a thought. Sounds like a good book-I'll have to read it! Great thought! Think we might go to Nathanial Philbrick & urge him to write one?
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Jun 26, 2012 9:18:26 GMT -5
Sounds like a good book-I'll have to read it! Great thought! Think we might go to Nathanial Philbrick & urge him to write one? I enjoyed it, think it was called "Heart of the Sea" something like that. I would recommend it. Not sure I understand what you would like Philbrick to write, that one sailed right over my head.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jun 26, 2012 15:09:23 GMT -5
All right, then, let's open the can of worms. Opinions coming, discussion welcome. "You want a story without animals." "Yes!" "Without tigers or orang-utans." "That's right." ... "Without giraffes or hippopotamuses." "We will plug our ears with our fingers!"
So Pi tells the truth. "Is that better? Are there any parts you find hard to believe? Anything you'd like me to change?" Mr. Chiba: "What a horrible story."
IMO, it's a bit misleading to see the ending as an "alternate." We get to the end and Pi admits that this was never a story about animals. It was about people all along. His postmodern message seems to be, "why would you care to know the banal TRUTH? Quit digging, or you'll ruin my story! Ok, ok, it was people in the boat with me, killing and eating each other, do you really feel any better now? Don't you wish you'd never pressed me about truth? Wasn't it a lot nicer story with animals?" Mr. Okamoto: "Yes. The story with animals is the better story." Pi Patel: "Thank you. And so it goes with God."
Aha! So, finally, 424 pages into the book, we finally find God. He is a fanciful story which makes life palatable, and hides the ugliness of who we are. God is beautiful, majestic! Who cares if he's pretend? Truth is relative. And the unenlightened investigators are determined to make Pi throw it away and sink to the unforgiving facts. All because they can't believe in the impossible. "If you stumble at mere believability, what are you living for?"Did Pi finally get through to them? He tried until the very end to help them out: Pi Patel: "Would you like some cookies for the road?" Mr. Okamota: "That would be nice." "Here, have three each." "Thank you." Mr. Chiba: "Thank you." "You're welcome. Goodbye. God be with you, my brothers." "Thank you. And with you too, Mr. Patel."
Think all this politeness is just Martel's writing style? No, this kindness and sharing is meant to contrast the ugliness of the story. Pi found God. Or else, he found the ugliness of TRUTH, and preferred to shelter others. I laughed for an hour at the irony of how the book ends. As they part... Mr. Okamoto: "I'm starving. Let's go eat."
Now, if you accept any of the above... what about those meerkat bones they found in the boat?lol...fascinating book. Or was the alternate story concocted to get them off his back because he knew they would never believe the real story, the one with the animals.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jun 26, 2012 15:20:15 GMT -5
Dinosaur bones! Now THAT didn't occur to me! I confess, I am baffled by the island. It's obviously paradise, Eden. The big tree on the island is the tree of life, or the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, or both (some readers of the Bible think--like Revelation says--there is only one tree, they are the same). These bones came from the island, the really "supernatural" part of the story. Is the island giving us hints about the true nature of God? God can't be a life-sucking, survival-of-the-fittest, primal force, can He? Ugh!!! Help! And I just KNOW the truth of God is tied to those dang cookies at the end. Pi is hoarding the cookies, taking everything he can, still in survival mode. Then he admits the animals are humans. Then he breaks down and cries. Then he promises "you'll never see Richard Parker again." Then he gives the cookies back in bunches, underscoring his promise. Just before the island episode Pi goes blind. I wondered if he only saw/ experienced the island in his imagination. As the story proceeds Pi seems to progress further into his own mind. Have you ever seen the movie Castaway? They say that the shipwrecked have to fantasize a social existence in order to stay alive. Is it possible that if you had a camera on that boat, the objective reality would not be exactly like either of the two versions of events but somewhere in between? The obvious explanation of the story is that Pi mythologized the entire story as a coping mechanism to deal with its horrors. But that strikes me as too convenient. The substituted story doesn't seem entirely real either. I haven't picked the two stories apart to see what internal consistencies they hold. The animal story, which forms most of the book, seems too rich to be just a chimera. But I do think that Pi is Richard Parker, or rather, that Richard Parker represents Pi's internal demons.
|
|