At first I was going to comment that Richard Parker couldn't have been God because Richard Parker left Pi once they landed in Mexico and it was obvious that Pi was still a very religious man. After thinking about it for a while though I'm not so sure.

In chapter 15 Martel describes all the religious paraphanalia in Pi's home. At first I took this to mean that Pi still believed in God. Or was it that he wanted so badly to believe that he tried to make himself believe he did by surrounding himself with all those statues, pictures and books?

In chapter 1 Pi states that academic study and the "steady, mindful practice of religion" slowly brought him back to life. One can go through the motions of practicing religion without believing.

In the same chapter Pi states "I still cannot understand how he (Richard Parker) could abondon me so unceremoiniously, without any sort of goodby, without looking back even once. That pain is like an axe that chops at my heart." If Richard Parker is God, then God abondoned him and he is trying to "win him back".

Alexia | April 24, 2004 9:53 PM

if i may repost what Brent posted for the first entry...:
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

at first, i didn't think that R.P. could've been god. But then Alexia posted her statement above. And i think that now i do agree with Brent.

I think Alexia's made it clearer and it makes much more sense how R.P. could be god. I was also thinking...if i remember correctly,

ah, well, i don't know anymore. I WAS going to say that someone mentioned in the other posts that we never really knew what happened to the hyena. So that and the whole R.P.-is-really-god issue got me thinking that ...
well, Ch. 53 tells us that R.P. does kill and eat the hyena.
At first, I thought that this meant that God or his conscience killed the chef in the sense that he gave up his life when he placed the knife in between Pi and himself and not putting up a fight when Pi stabbed him. Does that make any sense?

ana | April 28, 2004 2:16 PM

About a month too late, I finally finished the book. (I apologize, Barbara, for my supreme tardiness -- but I'm glad to have read it. Thanks for the selection.)

All of the thoughts in this and previous threads made me consider the book in a slightly different way. I left its pages thinking it was an okay parable and a better story with a sort of rushed ending tacked to provide meaning. But a number of comments, Alexia's in particular, made me reconsider parts of the text, and I'm more impressed with it now than I was when I finished it.

Still, I'm not quite sure what to make of the text. While I like Pi's rationale for giving the second story, I don't believe it for one second, and am a firm believer in the tiger/island story, if only because Martel told that story so convincingly. Like Mary, I was pulled so much that I didn't really find any parts of the story to be all that unbelievable or fantastic -- and found the story of the people on the boat to be less plausible. I think my disbelief has almost less to do with the content of the stories than the way in which they were presented.

I am sure that the tiger and Pi are connected; whether or not Richard Parker existed, he's a metaphor for a part of Pi, whether that's God's presence in his life or his own animalistic side. Beyond that, I'm still searching. Maybe Martel wanted us to search for an answer here, much as people search for meaning (and/or God).

About the writing: While I was enraptured by much of the text, I found some of the exposition at the beginning to be tedious. Not because, like Manda argued, it didn't belong -- I think the novel certainly needed it -- but because Martel is a far better narrator than essayist. Additionally, right before the island appeared, I was beginning to grow weary of the life-on-the-raft stuff, which I think was part of his point. Still, the story was too familiar (I was reminded primarily of "The Cay," which I read as a kid). We saw a lot of the same themes in Blindness, interestingly enough, and those have been reiterated a lot in popular culture recently, from Alex Garland's "The Beach" and script for 28 Days Later.

So, the book still lingers. I like that.

Andy | June 1, 2004 11:32 PM

About a month too late, I finally finished the book. (I apologize, Barbara, for my supreme tardiness -- but I'm glad to have read it. Thanks for the selection.)

All of the thoughts in this and previous threads made me consider the book in a slightly different way. I left its pages thinking it was an okay parable and a better story with a sort of rushed ending tacked to provide meaning. But a number of comments, Alexia's in particular, made me reconsider parts of the text, and I'm more impressed with it now than I was when I finished it.

Still, I'm not quite sure what to make of the text. While I like Pi's rationale for giving the second story, I don't believe it for one second, and am a firm believer in the tiger/island story, if only because Martel told that story so convincingly. Like Mary, I was pulled so much that I didn't really find any parts of the story to be all that unbelievable or fantastic -- and found the story of the people on the boat to be less plausible. I think my disbelief has almost less to do with the content of the stories than the way in which they were presented.

I am sure that the tiger and Pi are connected; whether or not Richard Parker existed, he's a metaphor for a part of Pi, whether that's God's presence in his life or his own animalistic side. Beyond that, I'm still searching. Maybe Martel wanted us to search for an answer here, much as people search for meaning (and/or God).

About the writing: While I was enraptured by much of the text, I found some of the exposition at the beginning to be tedious. Not because, like Manda argued, it didn't belong -- I think the novel certainly needed it -- but because Martel is a far better narrator than essayist. Additionally, right before the island appeared, I was beginning to grow weary of the life-on-the-raft stuff, which I think was part of his point. Still, the story was too familiar (I was reminded primarily of "The Cay," which I read as a kid). We saw a lot of the same themes in Blindness, interestingly enough, and those have been reiterated a lot in popular culture recently, from Alex Garland's "The Beach" and script for 28 Days Later.

So, the book still lingers. I like that.

Andy | June 1, 2004 11:32 PM

Andy, I am so glad you had the chance to read Pi. Since I haven't read The Cay or the others (never finished Blindness - it started freaking me out), for me it was a really fresh piece of writing. And I strongly agree with you about the "lingering" factor. I turned it around and around in my head for days after.

The "2nd" version of Pi's story didn't work for me either. Even tho the first tale grew more & more outlandish (no pun), it was still the better and richer story.

Thanks for checking in. :)

barbara | June 2, 2004 4:38 PM

I keep reading that this book is a fiction... If it is why does the author's note state that he met someone who told him to write about this story, which would make it real-life. And furthermore, why does the end talk about how after his survival, he was interviewed and they talk about the tiger and how he misses him. Please e mail me back with whether or not the story is real.

Sezar | July 18, 2004 8:52 PM

Just this second finished reading the book.

Following on from what Andy said about the 2 stories I agree the first is more believable because of the way it was told. This day and age we call it SPIN. Pi did a great job of the descriptions and situations so that you could almost be there. Just like religions, they all have fantastic stories told by interesting people. They are what I would call spinmasters. His second story was only a couple of pages long and not very convincingly told, as science is supposed to be objective and cold. However, it still doesn't tell us which one was true!

Shaunyboy | July 24, 2004 10:26 AM

Sezar, the book is fiction. Just because there's an author's note at the beginning, it doesn't mean it's a true story. The fictional author also happened to be a character because you'll notice he pops up throughout the book.

Shaunyboy, the second story had to be true. Pi tells the Japanese interviewers that it was much more interesting when he "spinned" it into a mythical tale featuring survival against a beast. I especially enjoyed, though, how the author left us a little room for doubt about the second story by mentioning that meerkat bones were actually found on the lifeboat.

marydell | August 2, 2004 10:54 AM