Quick Question about Life of Pi
At the end when they come to take Pi's statement, he gives two versions of the story when they don't believe the first one. Do you think there's any possibility that the second one was the truth and he made up all that other stuff about Richard Parker and the cannibal island? Would it change the way you felt about the book if that were the case?
Labels: Life of Pi, question
posted by mamashine at
1:19 PM
4 Comments:
Um, neither story is true, right? I thought it was fiction?
If it wasn't fiction, I'd say the first story is true. Just because I like it better and it has so much detail.
By
PCOSMama, at 8:16 AM
I guess I should say "truth", like what was it that really was supposed to happen in the book. As far as I know, yes, it's all fiction anyway.
By
mamashine, at 12:49 PM
Okay, I've thought about it and I think the second story is the 'true' one. Really, the first story is more about how Pi dealt with the blows life dealt him and focused more on his journey rather than the brutality that took place on the lifeboat. He made what happened to him into a learning experience and 'invented' different scenarios that glossed over the more gory and shocking details while focusing on how his religion(s), cunning intelligence and pure desire to live got him through a long, difficult journey.
BTW I have to admit that I thought it was a true story until the end.
By
PCOSMama, at 9:39 PM
You know if it was true -- like autobiographical! -- perhaps I would have liked it all more.
This is one thing I will give Martel credit for: I think he did a nice job of setting up an inbalance in the reader's mind so that we're really not sure. I appreciate that, as a reader. It's kind of like the movie "Babel," where everyone gets to decide what it's all about. I like not being told what to believe, and I think he did a very nice job of setting up the unbelievable story in such a way we bought it -- and then pulling the rug out from under us. (Or maybe not!)
By
JenniNapa, at 8:49 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home