Director Ang Lee and screenwriter David Magee have done an excellent job of adapting Yann Martel’s 2001 novel Life of Pi to film. When I read the book back in 2004 I thought at the time it would never be made into a film because the novel was too cerebral, too narrative heavy, plus, how could anyone get a tiger to do all that acting?
Life of Pi the film covered a surprising amount of the content of Life of Pi the book. So far I can think of just three scenes I missed. First, story of Pi’s family running into Pi’s three religious leaders. Second, showing how Pi used turtles to survive, and finally, the scene where Pi is blind and hears people in another life raft.
Still, Lee and Magee beautifully succeeded with capturing the philosophical heart of the novel. If you loved the book, go see the film, you’ll be surprised by how well it was filmed.
Is God the Better Story?
If you haven’t read the book or seen the movie, don’t read beyond this point if you plan do either, because I’m going to analyze the philosophical statement of the book and it will spoil the story.
In the main story, a boy from India, Piscine Molitor Patel, who wants to be called Pi, is shipwreck in a lifeboat with a zebra, orangutan, hyena and a tiger named Richard Parker. Martel tells us this story very realistically and we are expected to believe it happened. But along the way, Martel takes us through scenes that are very hard to believe, like the carnivorous island with the meerkats.
Yann Martel has crafted a Zen kōan into a novel. Most kōans are short, “What is the sound of one hand clapping.” Yann Martel essentially asks, “Is God the better story?”
At the beginning of the novel and movie, in a pseudo introduction, the author is told by an older Pi, that he can tell the author a story that will make him believe in God. Yann Martel creates two stories, one very long, elaborate, fantastic, awe inspiring – and brutal, and a second that is short and brutal. We are asked which one we prefer. Martel is right, everyone, including realists like me, will pick the story with Richard Parker, the Bengal tiger.
So where does God come in? How can this story make us believe in God? Analyzing fiction for symbolism is tricky, but for me, Richard Parker represents God though analogy. At the end of the film and novel, when Pi has told his long fabulist story to two Japanese insurance investigators they refuse to believe him. So Pi tells a shorter, ugly version that we know is true, but hate to believe. Then Pi asks the investigators which story they prefer.
We all want to believe in the story where Richard Parker existed because it’s a better story than the one of madness, murder and cannibalism.
So what about the prediction at the beginning, that the story will make us believe in God? I believe Yann Martel uses the desire to believe in Richard Parker as a stand in for God, creating an analogy, that the readers and audience must make on their own. Pi desperately wants to believe in God. Pi asks us to believe in Richard Parker because the story of surviving in a lifeboat with a tiger is a better story than going mad and surviving alone.
The whole point of the novel is to trick the reader into the question: Which story do you prefer. Of course everyone prefers Richard Parker to be real. By transference, we’re ask to accept that belief in God is the better story, just like how we want to believe that Richard Parker existed. We’re never explicitly told that wanting to believe in Richard Parker is the same as wanting to believe in God, but I feel it’s obvious.
Yann Martel tells us people prefer religion over reality because the story of God is a better story than reality. And I ask: “Is this why people refuse to accept the fact of evolution because they prefer the story with Richard Parker – oh, I mean God?”
The novel is an elaborate metaphor to explain why people believe in God. It doesn’t say that God exists. Nor do we know what Yann Martel believes. It just says people prefers belief in God because it’s a better story than how we see reality directly.
What the novel is tricking us into confessing is that the belief in God, no matter how unbelievable that story might be, that it’s a better story than reality. That when we’re pushed to the ends of our physical and mental limits, we want God even if he’s cruel, vicious and indifferent. That the belief in God is what gets us through this life.
Has Yann Martel stacked the deck? Is God the better story? Yes, reality does sometime involve madness, murder and cannibalism. And even in the God story, people die, animals are cruelly killed and eaten, people suffer. If the audience was given the Richard Parker story, and a documentary about the evolution of the universe with cosmology and the evolution of life on Earth with evolutionary biology, is God still the better story. I don’t think so. Richard Parker is like a magician’s diversion. If you could watch this movie and blot out the tiger, the reality of Earth is magnificent! Richard Parker and God divert our attention to our fantastic reality.
God is only the better story when you don’t understand reality. Richard Parker is ferocious, terrifying, cruel, indifferent and doesn’t answer prayers. No matter how much Pi loves Richard Parker and wants his recognition, Richard Parker ultimately refuses to acknowledge Pi’s existence.
So why is God the better story if Richard Parker just walks away from us? I know many people who have long given up religion but haven’t given up on God. They say that God must have created us but walked away from the universe and is no longer involved. Personally, I’m confident there is no God and the size, age and origin of reality is beyond our understanding. I find it far more comforting to know the rules of our local universe and not feel the need to blame a superior being for bad things or beg for good things. If a bacteria, shark, drunk driver hurts me badly, I just accept it was the luck of the draw and not a judgmental deity deciding I had done something wrong.
Where the metaphor of Richard Parker breaks down is Pi can see Richard Parker, and we never see God. It’s actually easier to believe in Richard Parker than it is to believe on God. Life of Pi is a wonderful novel. I’ve read I twice now. And each time I want to believe the Richard Parker story, even though I know the truth is the story about cannibalism. How many times will I have to read this book before the realistic story is the better story?
What if the novel and movie had been about a boy that survived 227 days on the ocean and had endured the incident with cannibalism and madness and survived. No tiger, no zebra, no hyena, no orangutan, just Pi, his mom, the Frenchman and the Buddhist sailor? It would have been brutal, but the success of Pi surviving the ordeal would have been just as magnificent.
Why do we want a better story? Santa Claus is a better story than parents buying kids Christmas gifts from Target. The tooth fairy is a better story than throwing milk teeth in the garbage. Heaven is a better story than dying. But why is God a better story than reality? Is God a better story than evolution? If you understood evolution and cosmology, God isn’t the better story. God is a simpler story, and God’s story is endlessly confusing and contradictory. It’s just God is fantastically powerful like Richard Parker.
Even though I disagree with Yann Martel’s assertion, I love his fiction. See, that’s the real revelation in this. Fiction is the better story, and Life of Pi is very good fiction. Humans embraces fiction with an intense passion. Richard Parker is a better character than a cannibalistic Frenchman. And for many people, all the stories about God, are a better story than the brutal aspects of reality. However, there is nothing in fiction that comes within light years of evolution. All stories about God are just crude children stories compared to the complexity and beauty of evolution. Evolution is just as brutal as the Old Testament God – it’s just not personal.
Here’s the final kōan: Did Yann Martel write this story to make us atheists or make us believers in fiction?
JWH – 11/28/12
Life of Pi EssayGet Your
Starting at Just $13.90 a page
Yann Martel’s novel Life of Pi is the story of Piscine Molitor Patel, also known as Pi, who at the age of sixteen survived for 227 days on a lifeboat in the Pacific Ocean. The boat consisted of a hyena, an orang-utan, a zebra, and a 450-pound Bengal tiger named Richard Parker; later on the true story is revealed which is without any animals. Early in the novel the reader is told that this story will convince one to believe in God, each of the two different versions are a metaphor to understanding religion, and by choosing which to believe it is choosing how one would view religion.
Martel uses the theme of storytelling in a powerful way; he connects his two stories to religion and faith, and allows the reader to choose for themselves which to believe. Martel uses the story consisting of the animals to represent the religious aspects of the events. The reader wants to believe that the animal story happened, as would a religious person from any faith believe in one’s religious text. When choosing the animal story as the preferred one it is putting faith in the will for Pi to survive: “Mr.
Okamoto: ‘Yes. The story with animals is the better story. ‘ Pi Patel: ‘Thank you. And so it goes with God'” (Martel 352). Pi hints that believing the story with animals is ultimately like believing in God like mentioned in the beginning of the novel. Though convincing the reader to believe in God from this novel is unreasonable to some, the importance of faith is clear. The real story represents the atheistic standpoint.
An atheist is a person who is aware of religion but chooses not to believe in it; an atheist thinks that “a little scientific knowledge will expose religion as superstitious bosh” (30). The truth in this story is that there were no animals in the boat, in reality each animal symbolized a human. To be truly athiest requires as much faith as to be religious, athiests cannot prove there is no god as religious folk cannot prove there is one. By choosing this story, the reader is going with reason and not looking past what seems impossible, much like an atheist not believing in a higher power.
Both stories are the same in the fact that the Tsimtsum sank, Pi lost his family and he went through tremendous suffering, and it is then left to the reader to decide which to believe: the animal or the real story. The two are just in a contrasting perspective, one being a beautiful tale and the other being the harsh reality: “The world isn’t just the way it is. It is how we understand it, no? And in understanding something, we bring something to it, no? Doesn’t that make life a story? ” (335).
How one person may see something could be completely different than another, so when telling a story each person has a varied way of percieving it. Religion is seen differently by various people and each individual has their own vision of God. Martel believes that life is a story, ultimately he is saying that life is beautiful with religion as is the animal story when compared to the opposing one. By using a metaphor for each of the two stories, Martel turns the question of: “Which is the better story? to, “do you believe in God? ” By the reader choosing the story with the animals as the more preferred story they are deciding that they believe in a God, or if they choose to believe the true story then that is choosing to be athiest. The theme of storytelling is closely tied with faith in this novel, and Yann Martel does an excellent job by allowing the reader to unintentionally choose for themselves which story to believe, and this ultimately answers the question of faith and the belief in God.
Author: Brandon Johnson
Life of Pi Essay
We have so large base of authors that we can prepare a unique summary of any book. Don't believe? Check it!
How fast would you like to get it?