Yesterday night, I finished reading the marvelous tale of The Life of Pi by Yann Martel. This creative depiction and interpretation of humanities desperate attempt to live a life of meaning and purpose, reveals and provokes interesting thoughts and questions. The character of Pi is a young boy fascinated with the beauty of religion and its function within society. Pi finds it easy to relate to three of the worlds major world Religions: Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity. The stories and spiritual guidance gathered and narrated by all of these faiths express to Pi something to be admired and appreciated. Before Pi begins his long journey throughout the vast ocean of the Pacific, there is a comical dialogue that takes place between Pi, his parents, and the three spiritual leaders that have guided Pi in his observance of the faiths. Each of the three spiritual leaders, along with Pi's father tried to explain to Pi the problematic inconsistencies and contradictions that these three religions held against one another. Pi, obviously very intelligent in thought, presented Ghandi's famous exploitation of religious tradition, expressing the need to appreciate all religious traditions and the goodness that it allows for humanity.
A major theme developed throughout the novel was the theme of ritual. Pi found that when he was stranded on the lifeboat in the middle of the Pacific, with only a bengal tiger to keep him company, the practice of daily rituals was what would keep him alive. It was through the daily ritualistic activities that Pi was able to attach his mind to other realities. The conscious notion that he was stranded in the middle of the ocean, in a sense, became numbed through the practice of rituals. It seems Martel is relaying the idea that we allow our daily rituals occupy our thoughts, therefore, transcending us into an alternate state of reality where we feel most comfortable. Perhaps, this allows us to no longer face true reality? This is an important theme that Martel has sewn into the threading of this philosophical work. If perhaps this is true, how do we come to cope with this reality? Is it okay? Did God intend the human mind to interact with the cosmos in such a way? Or, are we merely animals, that know nothing other than daily routines, that force our minds to encounter reality in simplistic framed lifestyle?
The conclusion to Martle's captivating novel brings you to the front of your seat in with the craving to know the value of the story. It is through the dialogue of Pi and two men that the philosophical associations with the text are met, allowing the reader to interact with the text in a much more provoking way. As Pi articulates his story to the two gentlemen, the men could not come to grips with the mythological tendency of the story that Pi presents. Although the story that Pi relays to his listeners is truth, the men do not want to accept the credibility, so they push for another story, in which Pi agreeably gives them. In his second story Pi depicts his story through the lens of humans, as opposed to the 4 animals originally inhabiting the small space of the lifeboat. Each human in the ship now represented an animal that had occupied the ship, and through this allegorical approach he again articulates his story to the reader. Although the story this time was perhaps a stretch from the truth, to Pi, it relayed another form of truth. his previous factual story, intended to tell the listener the exact accounts of what had happened on his journey, while his second story, dictated an emotional connection with the events that had taken place, that otherwise the factual story could not interpret. Therefore, both stories held s significant amount of value, which inherently was the truth of what had happened. It was up to the listeners to determine which story they could relate to the most, and further publish.
The theme of storytelling signifies another major theme. Humanities desperate desire to know truth inevitably interrupts their ability to distinguish truth. What was it these two men were searching for in their discussion with Pi? They wanted something believable. Something that they could attach their already discovered premises to, without allowing for critical analysis. What shattered the already constructed reality they had, they wanted no part of, because this would force them to rethink and rediscover everything they know. This is a scary thought and position to be in, but perhaps this also could be a healthy place to be. If we allow our minds to be complacent with the knowledge that we already have acquired, why should we study any further? Dr Camery-Hoggatt depicted reality well when he described paradigm shifts within the human mind. Once we have come to the conclusion that we are solid in our understanding of reality, something might shatter this notion of thought scattering your thoughts into an endless spiral in your transfixed mind. It is through the process of regathering these pieces of thought, and brought back together that the mind is able to interact again on a more stable level. This has been very helpful in my interpretations and study habits throughout my academic career. With Pi's original story being the truth, while firstly being revoked by the listeners, I believe Martel is relaying to his readers the need to be open to new realities. Not that we need to immediately accept them, but that we allow our minds to challenge them, interacting on an intellectual level with the new force. What is truth? What is false? Is it possible for truth to be interwoven with falsities? And even further, is this truth noteworthy when interpreting the cosmos? It is up to your open-intellect, and the ability to allow outside realities to critique and strengthen your understanding of the world. As a Christian believer, I find it greatly important that we be open to the critique of our faith. It is our desire to know God and further know the intricacies of His creation, which inherently forces us to challenge what we know. Yes, we are to be satisfied in the knowledge of Christ, but God did not create us to be a chosen followers that have become puppets. We are intricately designed beings that are allowed to discover and challenge the philosophies of this world. Is there such a text, or book, that should be established off limits to our reading? No, I understand each text to inform us of something that needs to be adhered to. If it challenges our faith, it should produces all the more desire to know and interpret the text in an educated manner. To remain distant and fearful of challenges is not what scripture preaches. If we believe what we preach, we should be educated believers is desperate desire to defend the faith, without the fear of failure. Further if your faith were to be proven infallibly false, would you not want to discover a new reality? These are all important questions that that Martel provokes within the readers mind int he conclusion of his Life of Pi.
