Ratings519
Average rating3.8
After the tragic sinking of a cargo ship, one solitary lifeboat remains bobbing on the wild, blue Pacific. The only survivors from the wreck are a sixteen-year-old boy named Pi, a hyena, a zebra (with a broken leg), a female orang-utan… and a 450-pound Royal Bengal tiger. The scene is set for one of the most extraordinary works of fiction in recent years.
Reviews with the most likes.
Life of Pi is a odd sort of fantasy, philosophy, adventure story that really puzzled me. Granted, I did read it in one go in about 2 hours in a sleepless haze, but nevertheless I still felt it was trying to be overtly meaningful in a counterproductive way.
Initially, I enjoyed the story. It is presented as a story by a writer who serves as a narrative voice. This writer interviews Piscine Molitor Patel, the eponymous Pi, named after a pool in France, in his middle age in Canada, with his story recalled in the first person.
The first part of the novel deals with Pi's childhood in Pondicherry, India. The two main foci are the zoo which Pi's father runs, and Pi's love of religion. Pi goes into great detail regarding the way in which the animals behave with each other - an example of rhinos cohabiting with goats is an oft-mentioned one in which animals care less for the actual species but more for the role they play. A great deal is dicussed regarding the morality of zoos and the illusion of the proud wild beast. Abruptly, we then suddenly have Pi discover that he wants to be Hindu, Christian and Muslim in quick succession, with little explanation for this devotion than "I just want to love God." I think Martel raises some provoking, albeit not original, points about atheism, morality and human behaviour - most of the time it is just not very subtle. My copy notes in the back that Martel thinks chapters 21 and 22 are particularly significant. All I really got from them is that love is a good thing, and that agnosticism (used incorrectly, as far as I can tell) is simply indecision.
The second part changes tack significantly, detailing Pi's adventures after the ship he is on sinks and he is stranded at sea on a lifeboat. I have to admit, the inital Author's Note fooled me slightly, so I was not wholly sure whether the novel was based on a real story or not. From my ignorant viewpoint, Martel presents an initially fairly realistic description of open-sea survival. Pi wakes in the storm and ends up the next day in the lifeboat with a hyena, a zebra, an orang-utan and a lion called Richard Parker. Pi has a period of fear and shock while the animals devour each other gruesomely, leaving only Richard Parker. Using supplies on the lifeboat, Pi is then able to build a small raft to be safe from the lion as well as collect fresh water and fish for food. Eventually though, he pulls on his zoo experience and establishes him as the dominant "lion" in their relationship. They travel, with vivid descriptions of storms, wildlife, and Pi's feelings. At one point, he notices Richard Parker has gone blind, and he soon follows. He comes across another castaway, who boards and tries to eat him but is mauled by Richard Parker. They then find some kind of floating acid algae tree island, which apparently lures fish to be dissolved and eaten. Eventually they find their way to Mexico.
I mentioned that I found the story initially convincingly realistic. I suspect the absurdity of Pi's adventures towards the end of the novel was intended as some kind of point - when being interrogated in hospital, Pi tells two versions of his story - one without animals and one with, the former being far more acceptable to the shipping company. Perhaps the point is that it doesn't matter whether it is true or not? Pi says only: “So it goes with God.”. The events also seem to conspire at the end to make it impossible to check the veracity of Pi's story - Richard Parker disappears almost immediately on reaching land and the boat shows only some remnant bones.
Other things strike me as odd. The character of Mamaji, or Francis Adirubasamy, seems to me to exist purely to decieve the reader. His entire contribution is to provide a pretext for the author/narrator to find out about Pi's story, and to provide the provenance for Pi's curious name. Teasing related to the name also makes up a portion of the first part. Perhaps it is for “character development”? The initial author's note claims that the story will “make you believe in God”, yet the initial focus on Pi's religious fervor disappears almost completely. Pi makes no thought comments about being driven by God, or inspired by God - he instead places the cause of his survival on Richard Parker. Equally, the “love” that is apparently so important is absent towards the end of the book - who is Pi going to love other than a tiger? Does God work through Richard Parker? Pi does have a delusional episode in which he “talks” to Richard Parker. My impression is that Pi survives because of his own determination, knowledge and tenacity - undermining this divine aspect somewhat. The tendency of Pi to hoard food following his experience - cookies in the hospital, canned goods in Canada - also seems to be meaningless or vague to the point of it.
My final impression is that Life of Pi is a novel which perhaps too hard to try something. Unlike say, Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea, I felt like I was having meaning and depth forced at me rather than subtly. It makes it impossible to try to take the novel at face value as an adventure narrative - the fantastical island and similar events mean that the reader ends up having to try and decipher “deeper” meaning from the text. 3/5 for an enjoyable, albeit ultimately frustrating read.
15-year old daughter pronounced it the best book she had ever read in 2000. I resisted reading it, especially the first few pages, but it is a worthwhile read.