• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Yann Martel: Life of Pi

I enjoyed reading Life of Pi, but, I don’t rate it as highly as others. I think all the hype that surrounded it probably affected my reading of it. Out of 10, I would give it a 7…… that ending was something special. It is a book I would recommend others to read, just try and forget about all the hype that comes with it before you start the first chapter.

I enjoyed reading about Pi’s childhood, about his time spent growing up in the company of his fathers zoo animals. The religion pages did bore me slightly, and I have to admit that I got a little bored sailing around the pacific with Pi and RP. For me, it was the ending that made this book.

My favourite line from the book appears on page 100. Pi, for the first time, introduces us to the Zebra on-board the life raft……….. “I turned around, stepped over the zebra, and threw myself overboard!” …….. Superb, I was in hysterics when I read that line.

As for which genre the book should go under….. I get a sore head just thinking about it. That ending makes classifying this book to any one genre a difficult task!




P.S I believe the second story to be the truth!
 
I thought it was all good.

Though a bit slow-moving, the beginning (about the zoo animals and religions) was necessary to explain Pi's views about animals and the 3 religions he adopted. This sets up the religious symbolism throughout the rest of the book.

I agree with Murphy that it benefits from a re-read. It's a book that you tend to read quickly for the pay-off ending, but appreciate more if you re-read or go back and think about how the different parts interconnect. i.e. Pi's religious beliefs, the story with RP, the ending with the Japanese, and his present life. (This is my 3rd time through in a book discussion and I get a bit more each time, reading other people's opinions.)

I think both stories are true. From Pi's context, why not? He embraces 3 religions and believes in all 3 fervently. In that respect, the same "truth" can be told in numerous ways.
 
Exactly - his father taught him that there is no one animal more dangerous than another, or one less dangerous than other - so why should he find one religion more fulfilling than another - or less fulfilling? This is why Pi is content to follow three religions.

The Japanese transport officers at the end don't want to believe in one thing, they do want to believe the other - even though both scenarios are true for, and believed by, Pi. They do, however, show a little glimpse of having an open mind due to the fact they end up in reporting on the first story told by Pi, even if they don't really want to believe in it.

Marvellous stuff.

Mxx
 
OK, I’m confused. I think I may have missed the books deeper meaning.

Both stories could be true. But I believe that Pi fabricated his own story to save himself from more grief by going into what really happened.
The two reporters at the end of the book, like Murphy points out, only wanted to believe the latter story. When they filed their report, indicating a small hint of Pi’s original story, ignoring the latter, I believe they were simply trying to spare the lad from more grief.

That is all I can make of it!, any deeper/religious meaning has gone straight over the top of my head. If anyone wants to break it down for me, go right ahead, I’m all ears!
 
We've been discussing it on a book group - I think the reason it claims "This book will make you believe in God" is because the story requires a leap of faith. The people story is so much more plausible than the animal story and the fact that Martel doesn't reveal which is correct, but leaves it to you to decide, could go along the lines with the theme of faith and believing the seemingly unbelievable.
 
That is all I can make of it!, any deeper/religious meaning has gone straight over the top of my head. If anyone wants to break it down for me, go right ahead, I’m all ears!
Click to expand...
I think you can read this book on different levels. You can enjoy it strictly as an adventure, survival story or as an adventure story combined with the mystical and religious. If you take it for the former, then it makes sense that the animal story was a figment of Pi's imagination and a way to keep him sane. However, if you examine possible reasons the author included details about Pi's religious beliefs and knowledge of animals (the first 3rd of the book), then you start to see there's more going on with the story.

I think Martel expects readers will take what they want from the story and, in keeping with Pi's beliefs, there is no 'one' explanation.

Rather than start over again, I dug out some comments I made on another discussion group. For what it's worth, here they are:

>"I believe both versions of Pi's story are true. One from a factual, (call it scientific, if you want) perspective and the other from an allegorical (religious, if you prefer) perspective. ( Aren't most religious stories, no matter the religion, structured in this way? - i.e. There are fantastical elements that you either believe or disbelieve, but always a grain of truth (fact) embedded.)

Obviously, Pi believes the story with the animals is his "real" story. And for him, it's the truth because it was about his test of faith and redemption as he struggled to survive - chock full of imagery from the 3 religions that he so embraced. It's not that he doesn't believe the other story, it's just that, spiritually, the animal story rings more true for him."

>"He leaves it up to the insurance agents (us) to believe the story they want. They tell him they like the story with the animals better, even if they don't really believe it. In the end, their written report is based on fact. Yet, the last line of their report says it all; "Very few castaways can claim to have survived so long at sea as Mr. Patel, and none in the company of an adult Bengal tiger." They couldn't quite bring themselves to totally disprove the animal story, either - so they combined elements of both.

Throughout the story and maybe life, too, there's always a duality: religion/science, faith/reason, passivivity/agression. Maybe Pi is asking us why both sides can't exist together? Right from the beginning, he believes in more than one religion."<

A few notes on religious symbolism:

>"Moon and stars: The crescent moon and star are symbols of Islam.
Early in Pi's ordeal when he's sure the hyena will eat him; he says, "Darkness came. There was no moon. Clouds hid the stars. .... I seemed to be floating in pure, abstract blackness." -

Another time, he notes the sharply defined crescent moon and the brilliant stars, he ponders his situation and declares, "(I want to live! I can't help but mix my life with that of the universe. Life is a peephole, a single tiny entry onto a vastness-how can I not dwell on this brief cramped view I have of things. This peephole is all I've got.) I mumbled words of Muslim prayer and went back to sleep."

The flying fish: Pi catches one and gives it to RP. It's followed by masses of flying fish, almost too many to eat.

On the island of algae:
He marvels at how green the island is and that "Green is the colour of Islam".
The island itself might be seen as his beloved prayer rug.(The vines and vegetation are tightly woven - like the prayer rug he loves.) BTW, there really are floating islands on Lake Titicaca in Peru made of woven reeds).
The meerkats all facing the same direction like people praying in a mosque.
The meerkats succomb to RP's attacks without a fight. "Meekness ruled."

The tree on the island: Hinduism"<
 
Well, ive just finished this and i absolutely loved it - the story was beautiful, as was the writing.

I even managed to get through all the religious stuff without crying once (religion in general gives me a headache).

Taking the story at face value it was a wonderful novel, full of anecdotes, coincidence and joy - im sure i missed much of the deeper meaning that the author intended, but i didnt find it any the less for that.

Phil
 
Reply to Ell on religious aspects

I just finished this book and enjoyed it very much.

1. Many questions where raised in its pages but ultimately it is a question between science and religion. In the absence of any proof of what really happened People would rather believe in the best story.

Pi asks the agents in the absence of any proof which story is best. They both agree that the story with animals is best.

The story with animals, although unbelievable, is feasible until they come upon the island of meat eating weeds. This was used to show that it is just that, a remarkable story.

The religious or romantic will want to believe the story with animals and the skeptic or those that believe what they see will believe neither story for lack of proof, but go along with Pi in a belief that it will spare him further grief.

2. Where did the Meerkat bones come from if they really were in the lifeboat.
There is always some shred of evidence that cannot be explained or disregarded.

3. Why choose between stories (religions) if the underlying theme is the same?

The three religious figures insist that Pi choose a religion, which Pi does not understand or wish to do. In fact they almost come to blows over it, a symbol of what religion can bring some people to do in the name of religion. This is also another reason Pi asks the agents which story is best. What he is really asking is what is the most interesting story to get my point across. This is also a story of acceptance of others beliefs. No matter what you believe in does not make everyone else wrong. They just get their point across with different stories.

4. The irony of his name? Pi is a universally accepted mathematical formula. However, he does not deal with universally accepted matters. His belief in three different religions suggests that he does not believe in each religion, but gets different things, including a better understanding of human nature through these religions.

5. The agents were only interested in how the boat sank(How the universe/world was created). The two different stories Pi gave didn’t really matter to them, however, they argued with him about them because they believe what they see and had a hard time believing his original story, even though it had nothing to do with why they were there. The agents, in the end put the animal story in because it did not conflict with any evidence they had gathered. Science and religion can coexist, although religion sometimes has to adapt to new discoveries.


I may be goign to deep but I would love to hear some replies
 
Life of Pi

Too deep. Can you go deep enough. This book is LIFE. Who does not know initimately what this book is about? I know fear, hunger, despair, joy etc. I know what it feels like to make sense and live with things that seemingly SHOULD NOT coexist. I know what it is like to create something that can and someday will 'disconnect' me from what I NOW know, 'want.' I have a raft, a boat, a tiger, a zebra, a hiena, an orangatan, an ever changing perspective, a piece of cloth, AND an island. My life, all life, RIGHT NOW, without any 'fictional' ammenities, the better story. Pi, life, the yin and yang, a cyclic progression of life. The astounding and not so astounding COexistance of polar opposites. Are we too close/busy in our own lives and miss the better story that we are all living? WHY
 
johnd451,

Hope you're still around - I didn't see your post 'til today.

It seems that part of Pi's point was that it shouldn't be necessary to choose one story over another - that neither story is the correct one. I agree with you that giving the agents a choice of which story to believe was Pi's way of saying, "it doesn't matter" - the result is the same - "I experienced an amazing adventure on the seas and I'm still alive".

You have an interesting point about the irony of his name. However, I disagree that he doesn't deal with universally accepted matters. I think the opposite is true. His story and experience is entirely about universal truths and how they are perceived. His decision to embrace 3 different religions exemplifies this attitude. He sees truth in all 3 and can't see why belief in one necessarily negates the others - an attitude that sort of says, "all roads lead to the same place, so why quibble about the details".

He sees the science versus religion argument the same way - i.e. Why can't science and religion co-exist? Belief in one doesn't mean the other is invalid or less worthy of consideration.

My personal belief is that the entire book can be viewed this way. You can view it as a light enjoyable, adventure-story, full of whimsical and magical elements; or you can view it as a deep, complex study of truth, religion, and humanity. Neither is right or wrong and I suspect Martel wants us to see both sides.

Well, now that I've rattled on . . . .:D

Ell :)

ps To pyhwhi :confused:
 
truth religion humanity

No, Ell,
what is confusing. I have read your past statements. You have really thought about this book. You said, 'This book is a deep complex study of truth, religion and humanity.' What does it say about truth, religion and humanity. Because they all coexist are they one? Is all life contained in them? Is this book a deep complex study of the soul, of every existing thing. What does anyone know of truth, religion and humanity. How deep have you gone. How many sides of your life do you see? Is this book personal? Is this book about the perfect balance of the many supposedly conflicting sides of life. What is Pi, yin and yang(passiontiger and apathyboy), a perfect balance. Are we a perfect balance. Is our life perfectly balanced. When Pi gave up and let 'life' make its own way, it worked out for him. Death created an oasis of life, the island. If we allow the natural rythms of life, does life take care of itself and show us this amazing perspective, this 'better' story? What does this book suggest about life. I would really like to know what you think. If you are still confused I can happily get more specific. I am sure you understand being a fellow rattler. ;) (I would really be interested to know; for you, what is truth?)
 
Well, I'm only a few chapters in (so forgive me for not reading the previous posts in this discussion yet), but it's been fun so far. I'm still deciding whether this constitutes a 'story' or a load of philosophical asides bundled together (kind of like the way I was thinking when reading 'Tao of Pooh,'which I still consider the clearest explanation of Taoism in bookform).

Anyway back to the book...
 
pyhwhi said:
You said, 'This book is a deep complex study of truth, religion and humanity.'
Click to expand...
Actually, I didn't say that. What I said was that 'it can be viewed' as such by the individual reader - not the same thing.

Is this book about the perfect balance of the many supposedly conflicting sides of life. What is Pi, yin and yang(passiontiger and apathyboy), a perfect balance. Are we a perfect balance. Is our life perfectly balanced.
Click to expand...
In a word - no. Here's my question to you: Is there such a thing as perfect balance? I don't think so. If you want to get into a philosophical discussion, then I believe we (nature, universe, etc.) constantly strive towards finding balance. However, the very nature of our existence, being dynamic causes disequilibrium. Thus, life is never "perfectly balanced". We may achieve moments when things seem in balance, but some event or experience will occur to untip the balance. That's what life's about; experiences and how we deal with them. It would be pretty boring otherwise.

When Pi gave up and let 'life' make its own way, it worked out for him. Death created an oasis of life, the island. If we allow the natural rythms of life, does life take care of itself and show us this amazing perspective, this 'better' story?
Click to expand...
I don't think we can just "allow the rhythms of life" to take care of us. Life is about making decisions and choices. Unless you meant we should deal with whatever life dishes out - then I'd agree.

I've rambled on enough. :D Anyone else want to tackle phywhi's questions?

Ell :)
 
Well, finished life of Pi this morning, and to be honest, I don't see what all the fuss is about. Granted a book exploring 'spirtual' concepts means different things to different people by its very nature, but personally I've seen these concepts discussed before, and they're not presented in their clearest form here.

If it wasn't for the fact that I enjoyed 'the one with the animals' a lot, then I'd easily forget this book (guess I was let down by the hype). The final act really cleared things up and provided one of the more satifying endings I've seen in a while.
What is worse? A lie that draws a smile or a truth that draws a tear?

As to Murphyz question of genre. Genre doesn't matter, they're all equally valid and there's beauty in all of them ;)
 
If you take an agnostic point of view (well it depends on the way you define the word), the one 'with' the animals could never have happened, leaving only the bleak story without the animals. Is the author trying to say something here about life without religion, or am I reading too much into it?
 
The Life of Pi

Hey all!

I am new to this site. I think it's great. I have been looking for awhile for a site like this and finally found one. Odd that there are not more book forums. There are forums for everything else under the sun...

What are you thoughts on the Life of Pi? I thought the book started out a little slow. I was not interested as much in all the religeous talk as I was in the adventure and survival part of the story. Once the actual adventure started I found the book hard to put down. The ending? What do you think? I prefer the ending with the tiger. What do you think the real ending was? With the tiger or without? The adventure was better with the tiger.

I compare this book to Robinson Crusoe. Also one of my favorite books. I think this book is worth a read for sure if you havent already read it.
 
Hello and welcome!

The Life of Pi was one of our Book of the Month selections awhile back.

You can access the discussion by clicking this link.

Ell :)
 
I found it a bit dull to be honest, and I prefered the second story to the one with the animals, and the opening religious bit to everything that happened at sea. Which I think makes me contrary. But I didn't see what all the fuss was about really, and overall I think I'd probably only rate it about 4 out of 10. But as I said, I'm contrary. :)
 
Somewhere here is a thred asking about book which you haven't read and don't mean to. "Life of Pi" is a book which I would place there. I actually started to read this book, but I stopped before I got to the part which is described on the cover as "the content" of the story. Nevertheless, I suppose I got enough information to dislike this book. To my mind, it could as well has a little longer title, let's say: "Life of Pi. A short introducion to the New Age philosophy." As I totally disagree with what New Age says about the world, getting further into a praise of it (no matter how well-written) was not something I wanted to do. So, I recommend not reading this book. Don't waste your time on it. Of course, all above doesn't apply to people who regard New Age as their way of life. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top