After the storm has subsided, Pi wakes up finding a zebra and a resourceful orangutan aboard the lifeboat. Suddenly, a spotted hyena emerges from the tarp covering half of the lifeboat and snaps at Pi, forcing him to retreat to the other side of the lifeboat.
Over the next few days, Pi learns to adjust life on the lifeboat by finding emergency food and water rations and building a small tethered raft from the flotation vests to maintain a safe distance from the tiger. He does this by learning how to fish to feed Richard Parker and him as well despite his moral code for being a vegetarian. Pi also develops a sentimentality for the tiger by helping him back onto the boat after the tiger had jumped into the ocean for hunting some fish and was on the verge of drowning.
One night, a humpback whale breaches near the boat, causing Pi to lose his supplies and his getting his raft destroyed. After several weeks and nearly at the end of the strength, Pi and Richard Parker reach a floating island of edible plants and interconnected trees.
It is a lush jungle full of freshwater pools and has a large population of meerkats which works to both their advantage as they use this opportunity to eat and drink freely, thereby regaining their strength. He and Richard Parker leave the next day. Pi while at the end of his strength is made to watch Richard Parker who disappears into the jungle without even acknowledging him.
Even though he builds a relationship of friendship and trust with the tiger, Richard Parker reciprocates by just walking away without turning back to also look at him. Pi tells them a different story by giving them a less fantastic but detailed account of sharing the lifeboat with his mother, a sailor with a broken leg and the cook.
In this story, the cook kills the sailor to use him as bait and food. Later, Pi out of revenge returns to grab the knife and kills the cook. The Insurance agents leave, feeling dissatisfied with his story. In the present, Pi ends his story. Pi then asks him which story the writer prefers. I hoped that this helped. I was talking to my friend about the movie, and I think their theory was the best. It's very interesting The second story is true. BUT Pi's thoughts and feelings and emotions after the shipwreck is the tiger.
He sees his own mother brutally murdered by the cook, through anger and revenge, Pi kills the cook. This was such a traumatic experience for Pi, that instead of living with the guilt of killing a man, and because killing is a sin, Pi thought, "Oh.. I'll just blame it on the tiger. The tiger killed him. Not me. It's not actually there, but Pi sees it, and his mind becomes so obsessed with idea of it, that he really believes there's tiger on the journey with him. He evens touches it and feels it as if it was there.
The tiger is all his thoughts and emotions. His emotions were so fierce and terrifying. Like a tiger. The actual Richard Parker that we see at the beginning with the lamb is dead with all the other animals in the shipwreck. Now what I really liked about her theory is this: Once he lands on the Mexican coast.
Everything is okay. He's on land. He's rescued. The thoughts and emotions he felt through this day voyage left and never came back. The tiger left and never back. His trauma and awful memories left into the jungle, the memories left, he seems them leave in the form of the tiger. Sophie Apr 15, AM 0 votes. Some very interesting concepts brought up here, some that I had not thought of or thought deeply enough about.
I personally concluded after reading the book that the idea was not which story you decided was true but understanding if pi had made the story up about the animals, why he had chosen to do so and what they and what had happened represented. Having read at least half the comments i would say that the story about his family is true.
That is the one we would logically believe. Now I understand the animals were about God and faith it makes me feel better and understand more as we are all mammals, we all have the same needs to survive which involve needing to eat, other animals sometimes and the predatory instinct and the fact that we like to have our own territory.
And he couldn't have told all the story involving the animals without bringing these concepts up. Yes, it was brought up in the first chapter when the animals were kept in the zoo but it would have been just a story and just an idea that you would more easily forget about if it wasnt followed up in the second and third sections.
I also wouldn't want to believe that the 'human' story is true because it is brutal I guess this also shows our nature though Our greed and survival instincts. Also because so much of the animal story was focused on! But I did not believe the animal story at all because as others have said it is unlikely and irrational.
I think you can get out of this book what you want to and interpret it how you want. Or just enjoy the story. Deborah Jun 20, PM 0 votes. It's obvious the author wants us to think about this pretty deeply. I haven't read all your comments, but has anyone touched on the meerkat bones? Those bones could be authenticated if given to an expert. Furthermore, it could be ascertained relatively easily whether the Zoo ever had any meerkats as Pi claimed they didn't. It is enough to give us that hint of doubt if we are inclined to the "reality" interpretation.
I am inclined to one based in faith with Pi's raft as a symbol of faith. He is trapped with a ferocious tiger and so the forces that would shake our faith are also ferocious. I disagree with those of you who said it doesn't matter. It does matter. And both are not true. Amruta Mar 28, AM 0 votes. I think the book is trying to tell us is reality is an interpretation. The book gives us an opportunity to introspect. The tiger is really just a manifestation of one's inner fear and doubts. Moreover, the struggle of Pi is our struggle against everyday odds and challenges.
Thus, I believe the book is about hope. It reassures us that despite all the trials and tribulations of life, one can survive on slightest of hope. We just need not give in and hang in there. Raj Jul 10, PM 0 votes. I believe that Richard Parker is his mind thoughts and fears. When something unimaginable happens, our biggest enemy is our own mind.
During this whole ordeal, he watched his mind. When he eventually tamed his mind, it helped him survive. By the time he reached the shore, he had complete freedom from his thoughts and fears. Therefore, at the end there was no relationship between him the real self and his mind. And it's evident when the tiger doesn't look back while leaving him. I personally want to believe the tiger one but I know it can't be all real I can't believe the second story at all, even less than I can believe the tiger one.
I think both stories are unbelievable. Ruth Apr 03, AM 0 votes. It could be a way for him to deal with his traumatic experience, shutting out what really happened in the other story such as his mother getting murdered and him killing the other guy like when people have traumatic amnesia of whatever its called when you just block out what happened and physically can't remember what happened read Whale Song by Cheryl Kaye Tardif for story about that.
I don't know if this is true as I am just making it up but personally I would like to believe it is true. Curtis May 24, AM 0 votes. Regardless of which story is true it was obvious that the detectives and most people would never believe the first story..
In reality there would be evidence on that boat of the carnage that took place.. Katie Feb 08, PM 0 votes.
As much as I would like to believe the animal story, who are the people that the 'brother' has killed in the first story? He confesses to killing one man and one woman. I found that part of the book chilling.
Either way he resorts to cannibalism. God, religion etc. His name is irrational. There are the twin Kumars, representing faith and science, which could signify the duality of both tales, but only if you choose to believe one of them.
Then there is Richard Parker, and the concept of Tsimtsum. Roxanne Apr 23, AM 0 votes. How did the animals escape from their cages? Apart from that and the bizarre island, I feel the animal story is more realistic. The human story, why did only one boat escape? Not considering the amount of young, fit men on board and the sudden turn of events.
I am sure it was the only boat to leave the ship as it was not full. The animals though if they could have escaped from their cages would have known what was happening a lot sooner and been stronger contestants for survival. Saying that, to come up with a story declaring a man he didn't know as evil is very harsh. If coming up with a story he could have just said he was alone on the boat.
Dave Jun 29, AM 0 votes. Clearly, neither story is true. This is fiction. Katy May 13, AM 0 votes. Madhavi Apr 19, AM 0 votes. I think the second story is wht actually happened. But ocourse, no o e likes it. Becoz it reflects dark side of human nature. How many of us happily hope or wish to kill someone and eat them? But people have done that in desperate situations. Both stories are set in desperate situations, wherein life is at threat.
The first story is about survival without resorting to cruel or guilt ridden means. Plz note that Pi starts killing fish only when he loses his supply of biscuits. The first story gives us hope and comfort, that shud we be left alone in the world with no support, we can still manage to fight it out without losing our faith and morals.
It makes us feel good, so good that we are not even willing to question the logic and feasibility of it. The second story is uncomfortable.
We may have to question the very faith we were raised upon. But we rather wish we are never made to ponder those possibilities. So we reject, look the other way. Pi did the same. We all do the same. Zibzib Jan 07, AM 0 votes. Personally, I think the human version is true.
I believe that the experience was so traumatic for him that turning all the humans into animals was his way of coping. I think this particular subject is up to the reader. I think you've got to decide what was rue and what you want to believe. Babs May 02, PM 0 votes. I have just watched this movie for the first time, because of the sad death of Irrfan Khan. I think the human story is true. Despite the dying zebra on the boat, Richard Parker is unseen until that moment of crisis and, after this, helps Pi survive.
But the tiger has to leave at the end of their traumatic journey so Pi can reintegrate both into himself and normal life. Is the tiger his own dark self or an angel who ultimately delivers him to safety?
Perhaps this is the part of the story that your own beliefs will determine - but I think there's a clue in the adult Pi's tears. Rym May 03, PM 0 votes. A major point is ignored: BOTH versions of the story are horrible!
There are brutal murder, oppression, and suffering just as much in the Tiger version, and we overlook this fact because: 1 Here, the characters are animals which makes us distant well less terrified than we are about the second story anyway. This even led me to explore how the tiger was God.
You see, It's all about how eloquent the story is. Religion does not hide atrocities; it embellishes them. It makes us accept and embrace these horrors.
The double stories are a commentary on religion. The first story, the one with Richard Parker and the other animals, is the story that Pi prefers because it is his escape from reality. It represents both a belief in and preference for the miraculous, as well as a coping mechanism.
The tiger story is comparable to a religious story in that while it's improbable, it's the preferable one. The second story presents a much harsher and disagreeable reality. In choosing which story to believe, you're not only looking at the facts behind the options but also the implications behind your final decision. With this in mind, the question becomes which story you want to be true, rather than which story is true. Ethan Apr 10, AM 0 votes.
I don't care, I just liked the story. We're not sure if you experienced doubt when it came to Pi's narrative, but Martel increasingly tests the limits of his readers' faith.
Maybe you grimaced before you even begin and say, "A boy and a tiger in a lifeboat? Like that could ever happen. I want realism. The Japanese investigators are right there with you. They tell Pi flat out: "We don't believe your story" 3. Their admission gives Pi a chance to defend his tale. He links storytelling with faith. He talks about how our understanding of the world shapes the facts we share about it.
He explains the danger of reason on its own. And he expresses disappointment in the investigators' expectations. He believes they want a "a story they already know.
0コメント