Yann Martel has said his inspiration for Life of Pi came from a Brazilian book called Max And The Cats A Novel by Moacyr Scliar. The premise of a boy sharing a lifeboat with a big cat is the same and it's an obvious connection. Other than this basic premise, I don't know how much the two books have in common.
But for tone and feel, I think the real inspiration for Martel is The Little Prince, a beautiful children's book with a philosophical subtext presented in a gentle whimsical manner. Both books are about being stranded all alone and then suddenly having to deal with an unpredictable companion, forced to question what is important and how one ought to approach life. Any writer striving after Saint-Exupéry has his heart in the right place. It is a hard act to follow however, and Martel's material completely gets away from him.

Life of Pi has absolute moments of brilliance and I loved many things about it. How I wanted this book to succeed! I was cheering for it like a soccer mom at her kid's big game. Imagine my face falling then, when the kid has a breakaway and is running with the ball the wrong way to his own end zone...

One of the ways things go wrong in Pi is Martel's complete lack of faith in the reader. He assumes we just won't get "it". He explains pretty much everything as it happens, and then re-explains it again later. Although I must say I'm not bitter about it because he doesn't do it in an insulting way. No, he's more like an enthusiastic child who is bursting with delight and cannot hold back.

The larger flaw is his fumbling of ambiguity, and for this story ambiguity is its heart and soul. These fumbles begin with his discussions of religion and philosophy, but it's really bad in the ending. I do not wish to add a spoiler, but I'll say that where a hint, an incongruity or even a single well placed word could have cast a doubt in our minds, Yann chooses rather to blast away and spell the whole thing out.

I bought this edition at the Goodwill! My favourite store. They wanted to charge $4.00, but I *proved* it was a kid's book by showing the pictures, and got it for $1.49. The unsound ethics of buying books second-hand got just that little bit worse in my hands ;-)

Life of Pi really inspires visual interpretation:

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.

A few of the illustrations from my edition:

n
She came floating on an island of bananas in a
halo of light as lovely as the Virgin Mary


Lord avert their eyes from me, I whispered in my soul.



I quite deliberately dressed wild animals in tame
costumes of my imagination.
n

Illustrations by Tomer Hanuka:

n



n

Life of Pi covers:
n  nn  nn  nn  nn  nn  n
n  nn  nn  nn  nn  nn  n
n  nn  nn  nn  nn  nn  nn  n

The Movie:
n  n

The Soundtrack:n  n

Rawr.

Piscine Molitor Patel is a young indian boy travelling with his family aboard a freighter through the Pacific seas, and carrying their precious zoo animals to America for relocation. One stormy night the ship suddenly sinks, and he ends up in a small lifeboat with several of their animals and, among them, a huge Bengal tiger. This is the tale of his extraordinary adventure, and how he managed to survive for months stranded in the middle of the seas with little to no resources, and accompanied by one of the deadliest predators in the world.

This was one lovely and painful emotional ride. Loved the origins of Pi, the zoo teachings, and specially the multi-religious Hindu-Christian-Islam approach. The shipwreck was devastating, and so too a big chunk of the time adrift. Pi an incredible little Crusoe, and Richard Parker a terrifying but necessary companionship; a beautiful yet dangerous bonding, but vital, for both. I remember most of my journey with them filled with great apprehension and distress; sure there were beautiful moments and a love and respect for nature rarely seen in other works, yet most of the time lingered a persistent sadness of uncertainty, and much despair before a sometimes cruel sea that took what little they had and didn’t leave much room for hope. Nevertheless, this was an unforgettable journey so worthy that not once regretted taking.

A fantastic story of survival, courage, spirituality, and love for life and nature. A sublime journey of impossible beauty  Meerkats Island , with loads moments  Hyena & Orange Juice, Parker bonding, flying fish  to remember by. And to top it off, a soul shattering ending likely to never forget  beach Farewell . Recommendable. Very.

*** Life of Pi (2012) is a lovely artistic adaptation, extremely faithful to the book, and an excellent complement to the reading. The scenery beyond beautiful, the acting on point, and the special effects impeccable. The film gorgeously captures the best heartfelt parts of the book, and cuts most of the sadness away from it. As usual the book won, I enjoyed it more, but I think only because I read it first and then the surprise was lost. I LOVE the book for its detail and depth, but ultimately I LOVE the movie more for its beautiful uplifting delivery; and a big part of me wishes I’d watched it first. (8/10)



-----------------------------------------------
n  PERSONAL NOTEn:
[2001] [460p] [Fiction] [Highly Recommendable] [Bananas float!]
-----------------------------------------------

Miaw.

Piscine Molitor Patel es un joven muchacho indio viajando con su familia a bordo de un barco carguero a través del océano Pacifico, y llevando sus preciados animales de zoológico para reubicarlos en América. Una noche tormentosa la nave repentinamente se hunde, y él termina en un pequeño bote salvavidas con varios de los animales, y entre ellos, un gigante tigre Bengala. Esta es la historia de su extraordinaria aventura, y cómo logró sobrevivir por meses varado en el medio del océano con poco y nada de recursos, y acompañado por uno de depredadores más letales de la tierra.

Este fue un adorable y doloroso viaje emocional. Amé los orígenes de Pi, las enseñanzas del zoológico, y especialmente el enfoque multi-religioso Hindú-Cristiano-Islámico. El naufragio fue devastador, y también una gran parte del tiempo a la deriva. Pi un increíble pequeño Crusoe, y Richard Parker una terrorífica pero necesaria compañía; una hermosa pero peligrosa vinculación, pero vital, para ambos. Recuerdo la mayoría del mi viaje con ellos lleno de gran aprehensión y angustia; obvio que hubo hermosos momentos y un amor y respeto por la naturaleza pocas veces visto en otras obras, pero la mayor parte del tiempo permaneció conmigo una persistente tristeza incierta, y mucha desesperanza ante un a veces cruel océano que tomaba lo poco que tenían sin dejar mucho lugar a esperanza. Sin embargo, este fue un viaje inolvidable tan valioso que ni una vez me arrepentí de tomarlo.

Una fantástica historia de supervivencia, coraje, espiritualidad y amor por la vida y naturaleza. Un sublime viaje de imposible belleza  la Isla de las Suricatas , con muchos momentos  Hiena & Naranja, amistad con Parker, peces voladores  para el recuerdo. Y para coronarlo todo, un final que parte el alma imposible de olvidar  la despedida en la playa . Recomendable. Mucho.

*** Una aventura extraordinaria (2012) es una adorable y artística adaptación, extremadamente fiel al libro, y un excelente complemento para la lectura. La escenografía más allá de hermosa, la actuación acorde, y los efectos especiales impecables. El filme hermosamente captura las partes más sentidas del libro, y corta la mayoría de su tristeza. Como usualmente sucede el libro ganó, lo disfruté más, pero creo que sólo porque lo leí primero y luego la sorpresa se perdió. AMO el libro por el detalle y su profundidad, pero en última instancia AMO la película más por su hermoso y elevador mensaje a la hora de entregarlo; y gran parte de mí desearía haberla visto primero. (8/10)



-----------------------------------------------
n  NOTA PERSONALn:
[2001] [460p] [Ficción] [Altamente Recomendable]
-----------------------------------------------

Story of a Hindu-Muslim-Christian boy who survives seven months in a lifeboat with a tiger. Gory in places, but believable and interesting ideas relating to zoology, philosophy and religion etc. The first third is very different in feel from the rest and although it describes Pi's life and beliefs, the images of India (surely a colourful place) are not as vivid as one might expect - it could (almost) be set anywhere.

Just had a nice chat with my friend Dr Nick about some things relating to books:

Nick "Let the right one in is a wicked film but I'm still not into vampires. Defo not Twilight."
Me "I'm still giving the Potter a wide berth too."

There then followed some random chatter about whether or not we avoid things that people like such as Potter/ Twilight/ Apple/ Facebook because we want to be different or because we are big sad saddos. No real conclusions were drawn at this point.

This was then followed in turn by a discussion on authors who Dr Nick was unsure of the gender of. And also some that I was confused about too. For example...
A.A Milne - man or woman?

Nick said he thought Lewis Carroll was a woman. I said definitely not but George Elliot was a woman. Blank look from Dr Nick. Wilkie Collins, Evelyn Waugh and CS Lewis were also included in this discussion. We then moved onto talking about books which will soon be transposed to the silver screen:
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (remake versus not-very-old-or-dated-original), The Great Gatsby (Mulligan versus Farrow) and then onto the Life of Pi.

Nick has never read Life of Pi but he described it thusly:
"That's the one about the dog, the snake and the fox in a big boat like that riddle with the chicken and the fox and the bag of grain and the farmer trying to cross the river but he can only carry one at a time so what order does he do it in?"

Er, no Nick... it's not like that at all but it amused me so much I had to include it here.
Then we both agreed that we also both got a bit confused for a while between The Curious Incident of the Dog in the night time and Life of Pi.

I think I may have just revealed to the world how even people with PhD's can be very under informed. Next week will be a short review of Dr Sam, Dr Gin and Dr Dana talking about the European monetary crisis through the medium of nursery rhymes.
The end.

** For those of you not interested in the waffle above, Life of Pi may also be interpreted as the musings of a young boy on the nature of tragedy, spirituality and survival and about how you come to terms with things when the unspeakable happens in an unthinkable way. Happy now?

This is definitely one of the most imaginative books I have ever read.

Spiritual by nature and fable like in its reading, this is a work with great depth. The ending adds an even more thought provoking element and leaves the reader with a lot to consider.

Book + CD audio. An adapted book for people who are learning English as a second language. This adaptation is awful. The chapters are too short and they didn't connect well.

No need to reinvent the wheel. Here's my Amazon.com review:

It doesn't matter whether what you tell people is truth or fiction, because there's no such thing as truth, no real difference between fantasy and reality, so you might as well go with the more interesting story. That's "Life of Pi" in a nutshell. Sorry to spoil it for anyone who hasn't read it yet.

Remember that season of the TV series "Dallas" that turned out to be just a dream? That's kind of how you feel after you've invested hours of your time reading page after page of a quite engrossing survival narrative, only to find out that it was all something the survivor made up.

Or was it? Ah, there's the twist that we're supposed to find so clever. But the officials from the ship company who tell Pi they don't believe his story are such hopelessly weak strawmen that the author pretty much forces you to accept the "better story." Pi, and, by extension, Martel, have no patience for the "dry, yeastless factuality" that the ship officials want, you see. Never mind whether it's closer to the truth -- it's just too boring, and we need colorful stories to make our lives richer. Besides, Pi and Martel say, as soon as something leaves your mouth, it's no longer reality -- it's only your interpretation of reality. So why bother grasping for the truth? You prefer the Creation story to the Big Bang? Then go with the Creation story, even if it defies logic and scientific discovery.

That's all well and good. Everyone likes a good story. But there's a time and a place for them, and the ship officials didn't need a story -- they needed to know what happened to their ship. To that end, Pi's entire tale is irrelevant anyway. And that, in turn, makes you wonder what the whole point of the book was. Other than, maybe, to laud the power of storytelling in a really hamfisted manner. Or to advocate for taking refuge in fantastical fiction when reality is too harsh. Or to champion shallow religious beliefs ("Why, Islam is nothing but an easy sort of exercise, I thought. Hot-weather yoga for the Bedouins. Asanas without sweat, heaven without strain."). Or to bash agnostics. Or something.

Be advised that this is not a book for children or the squeamish. Pi's transformation from vegetarian to unflinching killer, and Richard Parker's dietary habits, are rife with gratuituously gory details about the manner in which animals suffer and are killed and eaten.

The story promises to make you believe in God. Yet with Martel's insistence that a well-crafted story is just as good as or even preferable to reality, he leaves us not believing in a god of any kind, but rather suggesting that we embrace the stories that religions have made up about their gods, regardless of those stories' relation to scientific knowledge, since the stories are so darn nice, comfy, warm, and fuzzy in comparison with real life. Whether the God in the stories actually exists, meanwhile, becomes totally irrelevant. So ultimately, Martel makes a case for why he thinks people SHOULD believe in God -- it's a respite from harsh reality, we're told, a way to hide from life rather than meet it head-on with all of its pains and struggles -- and that's quite different from what he ostensibly set out to do. He trivializes God into a "nice story," a trite characterization sure to offend many readers.

Pi sums up this postmodern worldview by telling the ship investigators, "The world isn't just the way it is. It is how we understand it, no?" Well, no, the world IS just the way it is, in all of its highs and lows, triumphs and tragedies, happiness and sadness. But Pi and Martel's solution is to avoid the whole messy thing altogether, pretend that the way things are don't really exist, and pull a security blanket of fiction over your head. Create your own reality as you see fit. That's called escapism. It's fine when you want to curl up with a good book on a rainy day and get lost in the story for a few hours, but it's a lousy way to try to deal with real life.

Pi would tell me that I lack imagination, just as he told the investigators they lacked imagination when Pi claimed he couldn't "imagine" a bonsai tree since he's never seen one, as a way of mocking the investigators' reluctance to believe in Pi's carnivorous island. (Nice cultural stereotyping with the bonsai, by the way -- the investigators are Japanese.) But you see the problem, right? It's not a matter of lacking imagination. It's a matter of conflating things that are obviously imaginary with things that are obviously real. They're not one and the same. It's ludicrous to suggest otherwise. You might as well say that the story of Frodo and the Ring is every bit as real as the American Revolution.

Pi also tells us, quite pointedly, that choosing agnosticism is immobilizing, while atheists and religious folks make a courageous leap of faith. Yet immobility is precisely where Pi places us, so that by the time the book ends, you're stuck not knowing what to think about what you've just read. Do you accept the original shipwreck story just because it's more engrossing, even if it's less believable? Or do you accept the plausible but boring story Pi gives to the officials after he's rescued? Fanciful religious allegories or cold, scientific recitation of facts that might come from the mouth of an atheist -- we're expected to pick one or the other.

But it's a false dichotomy. We needn't make a choice between embracing religious tales merely because they're more interesting or settling for the sobering realities of science and reason. We can go as far as our reason will take us and then leave ourselves open to further possibilities -- just as Pi himself suggests. That's not immobility. That's intellectual honesty -- an admission that I don't know all the answers but am willing to keep an open mind about whatever else is presented to me.

Seems better than saying you might as well just accept the better story since it really makes no difference. That's laziness. And it doesn't make for a very good story.

I did not enjoy this book at all. I wish I read it with a tiger around. I wish the tiger had eaten me. I think the story was bad. I think the writing was worse. The simple sentences were mind-numbing at times. There were so many of them. I just opened to a random page. I counted. The majority of sentences started with “I.” They were also simple sentences. Subject, verb. Subject, verb. This was not one of those “craft mirrors content” things—the monotony of the ocean and the repetition as representative of the day after day afloat on wave after wave. How do I know? I know because the writing was not good enough to be a “craft mirrors content” thing. You might be asking yourself why I think the writing wasn’t good enough. There are many reasons (including the invasive/disruptive suppositions of what the reader is likely thinking).

First, there are the dazzling clichés. “It seemed the presence of the tiger had saved me from a hyena—surely a textbook example of jumping from the frying pan into the fire” (172). “How true it is that necessity is the mother of invention” (175). “You must take life the way it comes at you and make the best of it” (115).

Then there is the author’s strange fetish for figurative language involving volcanoes. “The laughter was like a volcano of happiness erupting in me” (153). “It had a two-foot-wide hole in its body, a fistula like a freshly erupted volcano” (161). “I felt I was climbing the side of a volcano and I was about to look over the rim into a boiling cauldron of orange lava” (171). “So while I, who wouldn’t think of pinching a tiger’s paw, let alone of trying to swallow one, received a volcanic roar full in the face and quaked a trembled” (278). “There would emerge a short distance away three or four [whales], a short-lived archipelago of volcanic islands” (290).

In the above examples, look how close some of the page numbers are. That emphasizes not that there were only a few bad pages, but that you can’t turn the damn page without being assaulted by tripe.

Of course I can’t forget the actual story. On page 121, the second section of the book opens with “The ship sank.” Good. Now cut out the preceding 120 pages. They are unnecessary, boring, and infuriating. Why infuriating? First because of the sermonizing. Oh, fifteen-year-old Pi Patel, you are so wise in your acceptance three major faiths that you can open the eyes of the holy men of each faith. Oh, fifteen-year-old Pi Patel, how wise of you to explain that “it is on the inside that God muse be defended, not on the outside…For evil in the open is but evil from within let out” (90) and other profound postulations. (This may sound like the bitter complaints of an atheist criticizing a book just because it mentions God; it’s not, I assure you. I’m an atheist who has no problem reading religious texts or about religious characters. It’s the sermonizing that gets me.) While I can live with illogical arguments espoused in religion, the rhetoric used to defend the existence of zoos is what was really infuriating. I’ve never really given much thought to the morality of zoos. I suppose, had I to decide, I would say that confining animals is more wrong than right, but I’m far from starting a protest outside the monkey cages—I’d rather watch those crazy monkeys swing around in their faux habitat. I won’t rehash all of Pi’s idiotic claims about why animals love zoos (just read the beginning of the book, notably chapter 4), but I will scream “Fallacy! Fallacy!” to each of his points. Again, it’s not the actual issue I care about; rather, it’s the abysmally half-witted logic used to defend the issue.

The plot doesn’t redeem the writing any. I planned to rant and rave over certain absolute absurdities (a man-eating island, a random bought of blindness precisely when another blind castaway should appear), but the end of the book precludes my making that long rant. In fact, the final 25 pages or so were the most enjoyable.

The characterization stinks. I did not care what happened to Pi at all. In fact, I was hoping Richard Parker would eat his dumb-ass just to end this four hundred page stinker sooner. Pi elicits no emotional connection. When he expresses some emotion, it is clunky and mechanical (due, in part, to the simplistic prose and complete lack of transition). For a book like this to work—a book centered entirely on one (human) character—the reader needs to really care about that character. That character needs to come alive. I suppose I can’t even say I wish Pi had died because for me he was never alive to begin with. I cared more about Tom Hanks’s inanimate buddy Wilson than I did about Pi or Richard Parker.

Finally, maybe I’ve been reading too much Perec and have developed high expectations for carefully crafted structure. Because for me, the following is nearly too stupid for words: “Where we can, we must give things a meaningful shape. For example—I wonder—could you tell my jumbled story in exactly one hundred chapters, not one more, not one less?” (360). Why is that so bad? Because it’s in chapter 94! This is the first time giving “meaningful shape” is mentioned. The first time! In chapter 94! How f*ing hard is it at this point to bang out another six chapters?! Especially when any given chapter can pretty much be broken into two or combined with others at a whim! It’s like Yann Martel realized “Holy shit, I’m on chapter 94 already. Hmmm…maybe I’ll make this an even 100 chapters and blow people’s minds. I’m a freakin’ genius!”

That’s it. I’m getting too upset just writing about this shipwreck of a novel.

زندگی پی جدالی ایست بین حقیقت تلخ و دروغ زیبا، واقعیت و توهم ، امید و ناامیدی ، طوفان و آرامش ، ایمان و ناباوری ، بین رد کردن و پذیرفتن ، ذات انسانی و گرگ درون و بالاخره بین پای و ریچارد پارکر.
آقای پای قبل از این که عازم سفر شود ، خود ذات و باطن خدا جویی داشته ، خدای مسلمانان را می شناسد ، با مسیح و کلیسا آشنا است ، داستان خدایان هندو را می داند ، آقای پای با همه فرق دارد ، جدا از آن اسم عجیبش و این که ارقام عدد پی را می داند ، پای داستان یک استثنا است ، او خدا جو اوست ، خدا را در دل طبیعت می یابد و به این ترتیب و با این مقدمات رهسپار سفر می گردد ، بدون آنکه بداند در این سفر باز هم خدا را خواهد یافت ، در دریا ، در طوفان ، در قایقی تنها در دل دریا و در دل خود که از هر اقیانوسی بزرگتر است .
پای ، پسر 16 ساله داستان در طی این سفر دریایی ، با خود آشنا می شود ، او که کشتی ایش غرق شده ، خانواده اش را از دست داده ، با ریچارد پارکر تنها توی یک قایق اسقاطی ایست ، او غیر از خدا و یاد او چه دارد ؟

اما پای ، کوچک مرد دوست داشتنی ما دل به دریا زده نه این که از هندوستان به کانادا رود ، او عازم سفر دیگری ایست ، اوطریق خود شناسی و خدا شناسی را با هم طی می کند ، در خود خدا را می یابد و در خدا خود را

پای آمده تا حقیقت را پیدا کند ، پس اگر با یک گورخر با پای شکسته ، یک اورانگوتان ، یک کفتار و ریچارد پارکر تنها در اقیانوس باشد او را چه باک ؟ که اگر شک مختصری هم داشت با این تجربه به یقین تبدیل شده ، پای 227 روز خود را در پناه او رها کرده ، سکان دست اوست ، اوست که تصمیم می گیرد کِی با ماهی های پرنده ، پای و ریچارد پارکر را سیر کند و کِی با آن وال بزرگ ، آذوقه آن ها بگیرد ، اوست که سیراب می کند . اوست که خشکی را می رساند و همان اوست که آن ها را از خشکی جدا می کند .
اما پای هم یک بیکاره نیست ، او باید تکلیف خود را با ریچارد پارکر مشخص کند ، باید مرزهایش را با او جدا کند ، باید خوی تند ریچارد پارکر را مهار کند ، افسارش را در دست بگیرد که سرنوشت پای و ریچارد پارکر با هم گره خورده است ، انگار که هر دویکی هستند ، با هم گرسنه می شوند ، آفتاب هر دوی آنها را با هم می سوزاند و با هم افسرده و با هم ناامید می شوند .
و بالاخره زمانی که به خشکی می رسند ، ریچارد پارکر از پای جدا می شود ، بدون هیچ احساسی ، پای را رها میکند و به جنگل می رود ، شاید هم به جنگل درون پای می رود که در زمان دیگری دوباره سر بر آورد گویی ریچارد پارکر و پای هر دو یکی هستند .
پای می ماند و داستان او ، داستانی که ذهن بیدار پای ساخته برای ماموران دقیق بیمه کشتی باورکردنی نیست ، اما پای است دیگر ، فقط او می تواند تلخی داستان را این گونه کم کند ، فقط ذهن اوست که ملوان کشتی را به گورخر ، مادر مهربانش را به اورانگوتان وآشپز فرصت طلب فرانسوی را به کفتار تشبیه می کند .
به گمان نویسنده ، فقط پای و ریچارد پارکر هستند که با هم می توانند بر این مشکلات و اقیانوس پیروز شده و داستان باورنکردنی خود را برای خواننده بگویند که دلیلی باشد بر وجود او و عظمت ذات او .

’ Life is a peephole, a single tiny entry onto a vastness.’

We have all heard the phrase ‘you can’t judge a book by it’s cover.’ While this is a good life lesson, especially when taken as a metaphor that extends beyond books and into people, places, foods, etc., sometimes the cover of a novel is very telling of what lies within. Yann Martel’s Life of Pi wears it’s heart on it’s sleeve. A quick glance at the cover shows the overzealous stamp of ‘Winner of the Man Booker Prize’, INTERNATIONAL BESTSELLER, the indication that, yes, this is ‘A Novel’, and an image that both depicts the major plot point of the novel, thus spoiling the surprise of who Richard Parker really is. All this praise lauded upon the cover is instantly telling that this is a novel that has reached a wide audience, and is most likely aimed towards wide critical acclaim. That is all fine, and bravo to Mr. Martel for being able to leave his mark on the bestseller list, something I can only imagine in my wildest of wildest dreams, but sometimes when reaching for a large audience you have to elbow out a small percentage of readers. I am that small percentage that was elbowed out by Martel’s attempt to make an accessible novel that will touch the reader on a spiritual level. This is a difficult novel to review as, firstly, I did enjoy reading the book. I gave in to reading this book that I have been purposely avoiding after reading the excellent review from mi Hermana. I had a lot of fun discussing this book with her, texting her my shocks and suprises in the plot, and discussing the book in several threads with fellow Goodreaders. As anyone can see with a quick glance at the overall ratings, this book seems to really strike a chord in many readers, yet also brings a large crowd of dissenters. While I did extract a good deal of pleasure from the novel, it just didn’t sit well with me at the same time. In all fairness to the novel, and to my usual reading list, I have to dissect this book with the same views of novels that I would any other. This begs the question as to ‘why do we read?’, and this reason differs from person to person much like each persons meaning of life – a theme explored in Pi. Life of Pi was a pleasurable read that suffered from a heavy-handed serving of morality. While Martel delivers one charming phrase after the next with a graceful flow, he would have greatly benefited from a touch of subtlety.

All to often, Martel would draw conclusions for the reader. A prime example occurs in the first few pages when Pi’s science teacher visits the Zoo (a zoo that he does not hold back from explaining how it serves as a metaphor for humanity), and calls out the name of well-known scientists whose studies pertain to the activities of the animals he is currently viewing. Martel spoils the moment by explaining that Mr. Kumar liked to prove to himself ‘that everything was order’. It felt as if Martel didn’t believe his readers could connect the dot. Even more obscure ideas are spoiled in such a manner. When a rain of flying fish saves Pi and Richard Parker from certain hunger, he thanks Vishnu saying ‘once you saved the world by taking the form of a fish. Now you have saved me by taking the form of a fish’. While I would not have made this connection, it ruins that ‘ah-ha!’ moment for those that do. It is that special moment of understanding an allusion in literature that keeps me reading a wide variety of texts, and it seems insulting to have someone to make connections without giving you an opportunity. Even at the very end, in his shocking twist of an ending (I must profess this novel has an incredible conclusion), the two Chinese men literally draw the connections for you saying something to the effect of ‘oh, this is this and that means that…’. This all seems to be Martel’s way of making sure his message gets heard, and is able to reach everyone. It is a noble goal, and it gets people who do not typically read to like and enjoy a book, so I cannot necessarily knock him for it as that was his goal, but this is all to my chagrin.

‘It's important in life to conclude things properly,’ Pi explains, ‘only then can you let go. Otherwise you are left with words you should have said but never did, and your heart is heavy with remorse’. The question now is, does Martel conclude things properly? I personally loved the conclusion to this book. He successfully pulls the rug out from under the reader and exposes the real message behind the book. Without spoiling anything, this novel makes a good statement on the powers of storytelling with both a fun plot device and well crafted statements such as ‘that's what fiction is about, isn't it, the selective transforming of reality? The twisting of it to bring out its essence?’ Had he left it at that, it would have been wonderful and allowed for mass interpretability and the reader could have easily connected it to spirituality. However, Martel forces the connection to religion down the reader’s throat. The whole beginning section of the novel, which details Pi’s exploration of various religions, seems irrelevant for the majority the novel. Occasionally he will pray or include some stunning statements on the beauty of life and the grace of God/gods, but it seems to have been only there to make sure you were looking for the religious metaphors in the plot and comes across as Martel with a death grip on the readers head, jerking it back and forth shouting ‘look here! Notice that! Remember what we talked about!?’ While much of the focus on spirituality was well done, it was far too heavy-handed and led to a rather narrow interpretation on the ending.

My major concern is that Martel only gave us what he thought the reader would want, making quotes such as ‘ I know what you want. You want a story that won’t surprise you. That will confirm what you already know. That won’t make you see higher or further or differently,’ seem like he wasn’t being as ironic with the ending as he hoped it would be. While the conclusion comes out as ‘bet you didn’t see that coming’, it really doesn’t say anything that hasn’t been said before. The novel is heralded as being an affirmation of faith, and that’s exactly what it is, an affirmation. It isn’t going to challenge your beliefs, although he does an excellent job allowing different religious figures to challenge the differences in belief of one another even if it is the same concepts anyone would learn in a 100 level humanities course; it isn’t going to convert any readers to a life of devotion; it only provides a blanket and a comfort to those that already believe. Which, once again, is not a bad thing, if that is what you are looking for. It reminded me of something a professor once told me in a World Religions course. He described church as something that, and this is his opinion, is a crutch for those who needed it. He compared the obligation to attend to telling a girlfriend you only hang out with them because you feel you have to and are obligated to. While his opinion is a bit harsh and easily offensive, what he was really trying to say is you should believe because you want to, not because you have to. Martel makes it seem like you have to believe in these things, and I see why that makes this book hard to swallow for someone who doesn’t. Once again, in hopes to reassure and reach a large audience, Martel rudely elbows out the remainder. However, I really feel uncomfortable discussing beliefs on the open seas of the internet, and I really hope nothing said here offends you as that is not my intention. Please understand I am only speaking in relevance to my thoughts on a book, not on religion. The insistence of Martel to wrap a cool concept with spirituality is a major reason why it is so difficult to talk about this book. It is hard to separate the two ideas, but I’m doing my best to keep this focused on the literary aspects. I’m getting too self-conscious! The whole point here is that a lot of what Martel says has been said before, better, and with more willingness to evoke a change in the reader.

All that said, there is a lot that I truly enjoyed about this book. If you push all the aforementioned details aside, this was a wild ride. This made me want to visit zoos and hug a tiger. Look how cute this tiger is:  Tell me you don’t want to hug that! I really enjoyed the wealth of zoological knowledge Martel bestows upon the reader, and his insistence on seeming ‘realistic’ with his animals. After reading this book, you will know why you should never, ever try to hug a tiger or take a wild animal for granted. He makes an interesting point how we force cute cuddly animal toys on children and make them think they are some domestic pet. While this is used as an excellent point that humans are the villain, which is easily slotted into the religious issues as an explanation that it isn’t religion that causes violence but the people abusing the rhetoric, it does seem ironically opposed to his final statement of how religion glosses over the grimy, difficult to handle details of life and makes it easier to handle. Are cute cuddly animal toys then religion? This novel is a very positive message to the world, and anything promoting peace and harmony can’t be all that bad. I enjoyed statements such as ‘ If there's only one nation in the sky, shouldn't all passports be valid for it?’, which is an important idea considering the violence that takes place around the world. I also enjoyed how the animal story is also chock full of scientific facts and details, which fuses the idea of religion and science together instead of showing them as opposites. Thre were some symbolism, the ones he left untainted by a forced explanation, that really struck me. The tiger itself is open for many views, either as God, Pi, or life itself - something we must face and tame lest it destroy us. However, could it be the killer inside us all, an urge and animalistic force we must keep in check in order to exist in a civilized society? In a way, I felt that the ending could almost be an attack on religion, showing it as nothing more than a pretty way of viewing a world as ugly as our own. I felt that the tarpauline served as a similar symbol. It was a feeling of security, something to stand on, but underneath was the violent truth of a deadly tiger. Perhaps it was our personal sense of security which is actually just thin and flimsy. When Martel doesn't slap us with his meaning, it is quite good.

I was simply not the intended audience for this novel. However, Martel has a positive message that he wanted to reach a wide audience in hopes to spread peace to a world badly in need of it, so I cannot be too harsh on him. He achieved his goals for the novel, but his novel did not reach my goals for literature. Still, this was a fun read and I would recommend it. Just ask yourself, ‘why read?’ and if the cons of this review outweigh the pros, then this novel is not for you. But if you desire something that will entertain, broaden your horizons of spirituality if you don’t know much about various religions, or reaffirm your faith, well look no further.
3.5/5

‘ Life is so beautiful that death has fallen in love with it, a jealous possessive love that grabs at what it can.’

Here's more tigers. Because you deserve them:

I was extremely surprised by this book. Let me tell you why (it's a funny story):

On the Danish cover it says "Pi's Liv" (Pi's Life), but I hadn't noticed the apostrophe, so I thought it said "Pis Liv" (Piss Life) and I thought that was an interesting title at least, so perhaps I should give it a go. So I did. And... what I read was not at all what I had expected (I thought it was a book about a boy growing up amidst poverty and homelessness). It wasn't until I looked up the book in English I realized the title wasn't "Piss Life". I was deceived for longer than I like to admit and, well, not only about this.

When I first read it I also thought it was based on a true story. I'm not sure why I thought this, I must have misread something (I vaguely recall thinking the prologue was instead an introduction). It was a sad (and ehm, slightly humiliating) day when I discovered the truth lay elsewhere. I guess your romantic beliefs must die someday, and that was the day for me.

See, it's easier to believe in the world and be optimistic about it, when you also believe that world capable of containing a boy and a tiger co-existing on a lifeboat for 7 months and surviving.

The truth is this book probably changed my life, not in any grand, extraordinary way. But with the small things, the small observations. Like how Pi was afraid to run out of paper, to document his days in the lifeboat, and instead he ran out of ink. Like how he chose to embrace three religions, not just one.

This book, and Pi especially, represent and embody a way of life that I admire. It's not about believing in God, but about what it takes to believe in something, anything really. Yourself, the world, goodness, life, God.

If it seemed real enough for me to believe it had happened, perhaps the real world is indeed a place where it could happen. And that's what I want to believe, even if real life might tell me otherwise.

A well-known and, in many cases, a much-loved novel.

I struggled with the first 100 pages (as did my buddy reader, Marge Moen) but soldiered on (as did Marge) thinking the detailed theological and zoological passages were skilfully setting up some kind of resolution for the remaining storyline. This didn’t happen for me, or it was obscure, or I completely missed it, therefore such a disconnection was a little baffling.

The element of human survival under duress was strong. There are metaphors and hidden meanings that could be discussed and analysed at length, but the danger of that is to strip away the overall enjoyment of the novel, unless it’s an educative text.

That said, as a whole it was a good read and some of the descriptions of nature in its beauty and fury were breathtaking:
“There were many seas. The sea roared like a tiger. The sea whispered in your ear like a friend telling you secrets. The sea clinked liked small change in a pocket. The sea thundered like avalanches. The sea hissed like sandpaper working on wood. The sea sounded like someone vomiting. The sea was dead silent.”

A 4-star response from me.