For me, it'll require re-reading to totally get it. It has no plot that you can point at and say "see there it is". That doesn't really bother me when reading a book, but this book had a lot of things that didn't add up. The theme is probably the question of the existence of God. The theme the author was shooting for was "a story to make you believe in God." If it was there, I missed it. I've read several on-line reviews and people always hit on "believing in God". No one has proved to me yet that this is the case in this novel. Besides having a boy who is a devout everything, one who claims "I just want to love God" when told he can't practive 3 religions, I just don't see it.

Problems I had:

1. The first 90+ pages of the book are worthless to this story. When I watched Terentino's "Dusk to Dawn", perhaps you agree, but the start of a perfectly good story was blown by the end. Fortunately, I think this was Terintino's point. I don't think Matel was utlizing this method. For me it was like reading 2 completely different stories. The information that is carried on to "part II" is minimal, and could be accomplished in a paragraph or two.

2. The book is written as Pi's recollection to the writer researching his story. The writer and Pi meet and then starts the real story. There are italicized portions of the book that I assume are thoughts of the writer of the tale. The writer stays gone from the start of the 2nd part to the end of the novel. What a relief! These italicized portions have no purpose at all, except maybe to remind us that Pi is alive, and will ultimately survive the ordeal detailed in part II.

3. There are portions in the book that are extremely slow. But the writing is done in a way to keep you looking for more. Martel gives you enough to keep you reading. There is no question that Pi makes it out of the Pacific because he's alive to tell the story. But he also tells you at the beginning of the telling that he survives in the lifeboat for 227 days.

These are small problems, but ultimately, the story-telling is good. There is a fable part of the book that is extremely well done, if you can ignore the man-eating algae island that Pi comes upon floating in the ocean. Perhaps the island represents something lost on me? I actually believed that Pi was stuck on the boat with a Tiger until he went blind and started talking to him. Perhaps Martel was trying to make the reader doubt the validity of the situation.

The bold letters in the very last chapter was also lost on me. I didn't see the significance. Am I missing something very obvious? This is one of those books that require a re-reading. I don't know that I could make it through a re-reading. I don't have the book in front of me, but in one of the chapters, Pi is describing the sky, and every sentence(a total of 12, I counted) begins with "The sky". If it hadn't been in a portion of the book that was going so slowly, I may have appreciated the point trying to be made, but I ended up skimming it, and then going back to count how many sentences began with "The sky".

manda | April 20, 2004 2:58 PM

i haven't finished Life of Pi yet, ... i just got it yesterday...

anyway, i've read everything written on here...and no, it's not spoiling it for me, he, he...

i do want to say something really quick...it's about the only thing that i can comment on at the moment:

i'm still in part one. the voice of Pi does not seem authentic to me. I think the author ruined it by including his note before the story actually began. While reading, I don't hear Pi, I hear Martel telling Pi's story imaging that he's Pi. You know what I mean? Pi just doesn't sound Indian to me. He sounds very western...

oh well...to read on!

ana | April 20, 2004 7:48 PM

I don’t have much time as it is early morning on this side of the globe and work awaits, but it is a book that does require re-reading of large parts, and in that sense I feel somewhat manipulated; however, having said that, I did enjoy it for the most part. Like Manda though, I was a bit confused about why the algae island was put in there. Hopefully, there are some ideas out there.

One thing that I did like from the very beginning was the small illustration of the tiger. I know that it is shallow, but I like that guy.

Steve | April 20, 2004 8:05 PM

Don't read if you aren't finished:)

Could we also talk about the characters in what I like to call the fable? I'm not convinced that Pi was Richard Parker. I totally loved that the mom was the orgatun. I remember when he first described her, in coming to the zoo, and the fact she had 2 sons that they were extremely proud. I could see the chef as Richard Parker, but Pi? The signigicance being that he had to tame his inner beast? I never saw him as a beast. But he never really said that the hyena was dead, did he, just that he was no more, or something like that. Does the French chef just become unimportant after that? He returns later as the "floating Frenchmen?". Why would he go from being someone to cut off the leg of an injured man, killing and cannibalizing Pi's mother, to "no more".

I admit it openly, I think there is a lot that I'm missing. Maybe its obvious, perhaps not. The thing that I did like about this book is that 3 days after finishing it, I'm still thinking about it.

manda | April 21, 2004 12:00 AM

I want to go back a bit to the points about “a story that will make you believe in God”, and how this story might relate to that line. (I must admit up front that I am not in the least bit religious.) In my opinion, Pi has been stripped of all he has – his home, his mother and father, his brother, even all other company on the boat (the cook). He has nothing left, only an instinct to survive, a will to live. So where does this come from? I can only think that it comes from his faith in God as Pi knows him. Not, however, a belief in any one God but in the concept of God. Martel purposefully shows us that Pi is omnireligious (yes, a neologism there). That it is not God as a specific entity but God as what maybe separates us from the animal world. God as a spirit, as a positive force, a benevolent and guiding force. I know nothing more about Martel other than what is written on the back of the book cover, but from that, it is obvious that he is widely traveled and with a degree in philosophy has possibly developed his own ideas of what God is and is trying to convey that in the book; a God that is not bound by doctrine and dogma, but one that can see into the heart of 16 year old boy, alone at sea trying to find something to live for.

Or maybe I am totally off. See page 317 where in the interview Mr. Okamoto says, “Yes, the story with animals is the better story.” Pi replies, “Thank you. And so it goes with God” and he starts to cry. Is Martel saying that God is invention like the story, but a necessary one? I for one am not in the least bit sure.

Steve | April 21, 2004 8:22 AM

Steve, applause applause. I love your take on this. I too have little inclination toward religion, and am endeared to Pi because he has decided that it is the concept of a God rather than the specific institutions that matters. I think Martel is telling us that we can choose what to believe in. Those choices say a lot about who we are...

Pi (Martel) gives two versions of the survival story. Human nature being what it is, makes the 2nd story more likely...but he challenges us to have faith in the fantastic, to accept impossibilities, accept things beyond our imagination.

barbara | April 21, 2004 8:46 AM

FYI - I do all my posting at work. So if I am a little fragmented, it is because I am trying to get my work crap done in between remarks. And yesterday a road crew cut our phone lines - no internet after 11 am. Lucky I got the first thread started at all!

Manda, I get the overall impression you didn't really care for this novel. You raise several issues: 1. The first part is worthless. I disagree. I think his childhood provides critical exposition. We learn that Pi is a zookeeper's son. This gives him the necessary insight into animal behavior that directs his fate at sea. We also witness his religious quest which I believe underscores a primary theme of the novel: Man's search for God/Meaning/Purpose/Faith. (last pg of Ch. 7)The fact that he majors in zoology AND religious studies emphasizes a secondary theme: Man's place in the animal kingdom, ie. For all our advanced intellectual power, are we not the cruelest of predatory species?
2. Italicized narration. These are the words of a fictitous author searching out Pi to write his story. I felt it was simply a device to supply an "objective" voice -otherwise it would be Pi's memoir. 3. Slow parts. For me, Martel's unique wit and originality were stunning. The story never slowed for me. As you pointed out that algae island was ... I don't even know!! What the hell was that? It threw me out of the story for a bit.

Chapter 78. The sky repetition. After 227 days of looking at it, I think 12 sentences describing it shows restraint. I enjoy those authorly splashes.

barbara | April 21, 2004 10:06 AM

This book did not make me believe in God. I came to this book with an estabilished belief in God.

It could be argued that God had nothing to do with Pi's survival and that it was Pi's own instincts and will to live. Or, perhaps God had been helping long before the ship sank. Perhaps God gave Pi the skills needed and Pi had the forethought to use them.

In either case I think it was Pi's belief in God and his insight to animal behavior that saved him. It strenghtened the notion that much of our strength comes from a belief in some sort of higher being (in my case - God).

This was a very interesting book. I would never have read it on my own, but I am glad I did.

Alexia | April 21, 2004 2:41 PM

Going back to Manda's first comment, I had no problems with Part One of the book. (I did, however, get annoyed with the author's note because felt like a device rather than a plot mover. The rest of the italicized bits didn't bother me, though.) My feeling is that it's supposed to give us some insight into Pi's character. I even liked the pages about sloths because it made me see Pi as one who looks for meaning in things the rest of us don't think about very deeply. Every move a sloth makes must be calculated and deliberate since a slight mistake (falling out of a tree, for example) could take a week to correct. Although it may seem like a sloth has no purpose, it is actually very purposeful.

I also fell right into line with those taking the piss out of Pi. After finding out his actual name is Piscine, I said to myself, "Oh, it's not Life of Pie; it's Life of Pee." Then, later, when he goes into explaining his nickname, I smacked myself on the forehead.

Like Barbara, I love Steve's take on God and Pi. But I have to go to bed now and will be back tomorrow.

marydell | April 21, 2004 11:06 PM

I didn't like or dislike the book. I'm decidedly neutral. I tend to always gravitate toward the pieces of a book that just didn't fit right during my reading. Usually, I find that my take was completely wrong, and that when looking at it in a different light, or in someone elses perspective, it sometimes make sense.

I did enjoy the first part of the book, but it seemed to me that it was even written by a different person. The fluidity between the first and the second parts wasnt't there, for me.

Good point on chapter 78 :)

manda | April 22, 2004 2:50 PM

To go back to Steve's eloquent point about Pi and God, I don't think Pi's story could make anyone believe in God. It certainly didn't change my mind. However, I was able to respect Pi for his faith, which defined him and was the purpose he searched for in life. As such, it really ought to be a story that will make you reaffirm your faith in God, providing you think he exists in the first place.

marydell | April 22, 2004 5:35 PM

I don't think this was Martel's thoughts, but it's interesting to consider: The tiger is god. It helps answer the question of who the tiger symbolized in the boat, and it would let me say, "Yeah, I guess if the tiger was god, I kinda beleived in him up to the wacky stuff anyway". The tiger had special freedom on the island, so if tiger = god, the island may make more sence than otherwise. ?? What do others think?

brent | April 23, 2004 11:15 AM

i'm so late that i tripped on my way here!
just a few moments to catch up on all the comments,

but i'm here!!!

ana | April 23, 2004 5:08 PM

one word, WOW.
i really, really, really enjoyed this story. i must admit, i read the first few comments posted here, even the first entry. not even that prepared me to what i was to read. it all turned an unexpected twist in plot. even at the end, with the alternate story.

but then i was thinking...okay, no wait...
FIRST, this is really true, right? this all happened? i just want to be really sure about that.
so i was thinking that since this is a true story (assuming your answers will be yes...), then Pi Patel tells a great story and his life makes a great story. i don't understand a quote from the L.A. Times Book Review on the cover of the book (paperback) that says, "A story to make you believe in the soul-searching power of fiction." i really don't understand that review.

okay, my take on the novel.
First, like I mentioned before, I didn't like the author's note at the beginnin of the book. I think I can understand it's purpose, but the fact that it was at the beginning ruined the whole first part of the book for me. Like I said in my first comment, The voice of Pi didn't seem authentic to me. The reason why I said that it sounded western was because to me, it sounded like Martel. I couldn't help but picture Martel living what young Pi Pre-sinking was living. Mmm...i dunno...
So with that said, the first part of the book really annoyed me a lot. As it started it out, I enjoyed it. What really bothered me was all his talk about faith and religion and blah blah blah... His philosophies, and even some animal insights. That whole part sounded soo preachy to me. So, with ... what... 150 pages left, I skimmed through it.

The Second part of the book...WOW. I said that already. It was just an amazing story, even with that questionable island. The interview at the end was hilarious.

Oh, the parts written in italics during the First part...i dunno....
At first I was okay with it. Then it seemed patronizing to me. Then I just didn't care for it.

So...overall, (i know i didn't get into details, but i'm trying to catch up!)
At first, the fact that he was of three religions bothered me. It seemed to obvious and it screamed: trying to make the world understand we cah have peace!
I thought it was ... not original. During the second part, my opinion changed. I found it very funny how he would just mix the three religions. It was amusing.

When I first read the reviews to this book a while back, when deciding for Middlesex, I read somewhere that it was comical and blah blah blah...
Well, it was. haha
It really was. It had it's very funny parts. It was a good adventure, if you can call it that...an unasked-for adventure...

ana | April 23, 2004 5:25 PM

oh, i almost forgot, Pi was authentically Indian to me in the Second Part ;)

okay...now to get on the same wavelength as everyone else...

before i forget, my book came with a reading group guide inside...i don't really know if it's helpful...

-i'm confused...the story is told to Martel by Pi. So, the words usesd in the novel, are they Martel's or Pi's? I keep thinking, "wow, Martel can really write a good story with a good plot!" But then I remember that it's a real story. So is credit given to him? I'm sure some...I don't know...

-I liked knowing that Pi survived before we knew what happened.

-For Manda, the bold letters at the end of the book was just to let the reader know that those parts were really spoken in Japanese but they were translated for the purpose giving us all the conversation in English.

-At first, during the alternate story, I did think that Pi was Richard Parker, especially since he says that he's lost and he's hiding somewhere and that they'll never find him. But during the retelling of events...some things didn't add up.

-I could see how the orang-utan was his mother. From the beginning, I thought she had a motherly quality.

-I, too, am confused with Pi's comment, "and so it goes with God." I understood it as, only god knows the truth...

-I refuse to believe the second story is real...hah, like Barbara said, we're given two stories to challenge and accept.

-I think the first part is important too, in that it gives us insight to Pi's bringing up which help us understand how he deals with the second part.

-okay...not all of the animal insights were boring. i just felt that some were irrelevant. but i did like the one about the sloths.

-the god issue...
--i don't agree with the view that R.P. was god...i just don't...
--this novel didn't make me believe in god...
--and....

ana | April 23, 2004 5:53 PM

Great book. I thought I knew what was going on, then it ended and I realized I missed everything and had to read it again.
The author is spiritually hungry at the beginning. His conclusion at the end is that it's better to believe in God(the better story) than to have no faith(the dry, factual story), believing only what you see.
I'm still uncertain about the island. The island is Eden. The "fruit" is knowledge. Maybe he landed on an island, recovered, and realized what he had done(eaten human flesh) and couldn't live with himself, so he cast himself adrift again. Once he landed in Mexico, there was no where to run, so he had to live with it.

chuck | May 11, 2004 2:35 PM