Personal Reflection: Imagination not dead; liberated.

I realized early on in this project that my choice of novel was a little different from many other's, whose choices involved cornerstone classics of Canlit and intimidating names such as Atwood, Findley, and Ondaatje. Life of Pi does not have the seniority of a 'classic', nor does its author Yann Martel have a particularly auspicious resumé of novels. However, he is in fact a quarky student of philosophy with a slightly twisted sense of humour. I can offer no better explanation for this novel's appeal to me.

I knew that if a novel were to have any hope in heaven of capturing my attention for two months, it would have to be off-the-wall, refreshingly engaging, and full of zeal. I found these and more in Life of Pi. Martel illustrates many, perhaps hundreds of realities pertaining to the human condition under duress through his main character Pi, but does so in a way that is utterly unpretentious and unassuming, yet deceptively profound. On the cover of my copy is a quotation from Atwood herself: "It's fresh, original, smart, devious, and crammed with absorbing lore." It's the 'absorbing lore' part that is so deceptive in such a 'light' narrative tone, but it's also what makes it so much fun to wrestle with!

That is the verb I would use to describe the way Martel forced me to consider Life of Pi: wrestle. It took a great deal of scribbling, rereading, head-scratching and flow-chart drawing, but eventually I felt that I was able to pin it at least part of it down in a headlock. The results of this were my explication and apologia. But I owe much of my success to the format of this project. Not only did it provide a stylish medium for organizing scribbled ideas, but it yielded some incredibly valuable peer commentary that ensured my thinking wouldn't become stagnant.

The availability of changeable, arrangeable blog entries meant that I could freely enjoy the process of exploring and understanding Life of Pi and the problems it presented to me. It brusquely challenged the way I consider elements of fiction and, more importantly, some very personal (and up until now steadfast) philosophies regarding faith, religion, happiness, the useful application of fact, and the treatment of zoo animals.

In this fashion did Martel play with me a brutally one-sided game of Truth or Dare. And how could I not oblige when Pi affirms his own faith in the face of the Pacific Ocean and a Bengal tiger whilst I struggle with my own turbulent thoughts in the comfort of my squishy living room chair!?

Life of Pi has taught me to be curious, to dissect bits of my own thinking that would rather be left alone, and to stick my nose in places it normally wouldn't go; much the same way that a writer might go about highlighting a truth through a work of fiction. Reading and writing cannot be contained. They cannot be tamed. They cannot be trained. It is through this realization that we liberate our own imaginations from the bonds of literal interpretation and monotonous explanation. As the truths of the human condition are infinite, so are the potential illustrations of it through all art forms.

"If we citizens, do not support our artists, then we sacrifice our imagination on the altar of crude reality and we end up believing in nothing and having worthless dreams."

(Yann Martel, Life of Pi, Author's Note, xi)

Works Cited

Borg, Marcus J. Reading the Bible Again for the First Time. 1st ed. San Fransico: Harper San Fransico, 2001. 1+.


Keren, Michael. "Life of Pi and The Clash of Civilizations." APSA Annual Meeting. Philidelphia. Aug.-Sept. 2006.


Martel, Yann. Life of Pi. 2nd ed. Toronto: Vintage Canada, 2001. V+.


Mitchell, Reverend Lynn A. "Symbolism in society." Personal interview. 14 Nov. 2008.


Wilson, Greg. "Life of Pi: Metafiction." Essays on Yann Martel's Life of Pi. 2005. Thomson Corporation. 9 Nov. 2008 .

Explication: Pi's Deliverance

Of George Polti’s thirty-six dramatic situations the second, Deliverance, seemed to fit best. It’s a bit like fitting a square peg in a round hole since Life of Pi is not necessarily meant to be read literally, but it is an effective choice that shines the spotlight on some crucial elements in the story. This explication must not be expected to support a thesis for the salvation of Pi by an act of God. It is to be read rather as a series of examples drawn from the novel itself that correlate in a meaningful way to the idea of ‘Deliverance’. It should be noted that the rigid outline of the Threat, the Victim, and Rescuer will not always be specifically identified. Conventionally speaking, these three archetypes are three separate entities. In Life of Pi, however, only the Threat remains constant in its position, which is of course the omnipresent danger of the ocean and the elements.

The concept of ‘Deliverance’ in Life of Pi is focussed completely on the main character Pi Patel when, being the sole survivor of a shipwreck, survives on his own for two hundred and seventy-seven days. In actual fact, not entirely alone- he does spend the entirety of the voyage in the company of a four hundred and fifty pound Bengal tiger. But this will be addressed later on. To start, this relatively brief analysis will look at Pi’s two most personal, internal struggles and how he is emancipated from them.

The first example pertains to how Pi, without even realizing it, has conditioned himself to be liberated from two extremes which, had he succumbed under the full weight of either one, would have yielded ineffective results at the very least. They are: dispassionate reason and blind fundamentalist faith. Because Pi dips a toe in each of them without plunging head-first into the deep end of either one, he is able to evaluate the purposes and benefits of believing in faith and trusting in reason. More importantly, he is able to call on both at their opportune moments. In reconciling his faith and his application of reason, he saves himself from trying to rationalize the absurd situation in which he finds himself (which would be a waste of time and precious energy) and also from the stagnant belief that salvation will come to him if he prays hard enough.

Instead, he keeps a balanced diet of both throughout the journey.

In between Pi’s renewal of faith and his employment of reason lies the second internal struggle: the despair in and fear of his surroundings which are at first traumatically desolate and are punctuated by the presence of a live tiger. Pi tells us that fear leads to rash decisions. “You dismiss your last allies: hope and trust. Fear, which is but an impression, has triumphed over you.” (Pi, pp.179)

Interestingly enough, in the very next chapter, which begins on page 179, Pi speaks plainly about the next suite of examples of deliverance, which actually involve a third party: Richard Parker the Bengal tiger.

“It is the irony of this story that the one who scared me witless to start with was the very same who brought me peace, purpose, I daresay even wholeness.” (Pi, pp.179) In the following cases, it is Richard Parker who, strangely enough, plays the part of the ‘Rescuer’. He ultimately saves Pi from wallowing in futility, from losing his sense of humanity, and from simple loneliness. “[Richard Parker] pushed [Pi] on to go on living.” (Pi, pp.180)

Pi hitherto decides that if he wants Richard Parker to live, it is absolutely crucial to train him to recognize Pi as the alpha. “If he died, [Pi] would be left alone with despair, a foe even more formidable than a tiger.” (Pi, pp.182) From now on when dealing with Richard Parker, Pi uses his experiential knowledge of animals in order to give direction and meaning to the long hours of the day which would otherwise drive him mad with cabin fever.

In taming the tiger, Pi is also able to retain a sturdy grasp on his humanity. He already has to descend to eating raw and sun-cured meat to survive, thereby obliterating years of practiced Hinduism and Buddhism. So it is no small measure of fortune that in the face of an animal Pi is able to keep a human identity from slipping away. Pi’s greatest benefit in withholding his human ‘self’ from the clutches of the elements is the retention of his sanity. Without purpose, his mind would deteriorate, he would lose his authority over Richard Parker, and would most likely die. To summarize, Pi, juxtaposed to Richard Parker, manages to salvage enough of his reasonable self so as to continue to live and love, and most all to continue to trust and have faith in his self.

Death is to rain as Rescuer is to umbrella. This is the epitome of ‘Deliverance’: to be somehow saved from any manner of deaths. But considering the pluviosity of Pi’s situation, does it not stand that there is something more than the characteristics of the Threat, Victim, and Rescuer that affects the water-resistance of the umbrella?

This is the final (if slightly inconclusive) component to this explication. So far, the elements of the Rescuer position have been directly associated with either Pi or Richard Parker and their actions and decisions. But in the case of Life of Pi, can it be assumed that only these two characters (Pi in particular) have subliminal control over the nature of their survival?

No, for the cookie-cutter model of ‘Deliverance’ does not in any way account for the nature of the universe. Consider the following:

Alex leads Taylor into the depths of a forest and leaves her there with only the knowledge that everything she needs to survive is in the forest. Taylor finds everything she could possibly need to live: water, food, and shelter. Yes, she had to use her own intuition and perhaps even some outside knowledge of the forest to accomplish this, but the fact remains that the only reason she is able to put her intuition to use is because everything was already there in the first place. The impartial nature of the forest just so happens to include those basic needs that Taylor, a female human being, needs to survive.

Referring back to Life of Pi, what if there were no Dorado fish or sea turtles where Pi’s lifeboat floated? What if salt water could not be desalinated? What if the algae island didn’t exist? What if he hadn't been riding a current that was eventually land-bound? The answer is that if any of these were true, neither Pi’s faith nor his reason would have been able to help him. Pi is able to survive through the symbiotic relationship with the sea and with Richard Parker that he nurtures throughout his voyage. The irony in Pi's Deliverence lies in the fact that it is the natural qualities of the Pacific Ocean's environment that mortally endanger him while providing him with the basic means to survive. So is it also with Richard Parker- the wild, feral animal that saved Pi's humanity.

Apologia: Truth, Fact, and Metaphor

“Metaphor is poetry plus, not factuality minus.”

~Marcus Borg, Reading the Bible Again for the First Time

The point of interpretive fiction is to represent or give light to an aspect (or several aspects) of our human condition, our reality. In her instructional novel Bird by Bird, Ann Lamott tells us that it is the responsibility of the writer to tell the truth by any and every means necessary. Yann Martel’s Life of Pi demonstrates that the use of symbolism or metaphor is one of the most effective means of conveying truth(s) in Western society. “In terms of its roots, ‘metaphor’ means ‘to carry with’, and what metaphor carries or bears is resonances or associations of meaning. The point is not to believe in a metaphor, but to see in light of it.” (Borg, pp.41) One of the most important aspects of metaphor in literature of any kind is that because it is used to illustrate truths in our realities, the metaphor itself is true regardless of its factuality.

Truth is the most provocative, most confounding, and most daunting of all abstract concepts. For all its intangibility, it teases, torments, and mocks reality like a cat plays with a squealing mouse before disembowelling it. The notion of our realities being compared to a doomed rodent is most distressing, especially when we have nothing to fight back with- in fact it’s terrifying. We have, however, developed a highly intricate way of rationalizing this phobia: by doing just that, rationalizing; measuring, quantifying, formulating. At the turn of the seventeenth century, science became the weapon of choice, proven fact its ammunition. To this day, we fight back with equal signs. “With modern science came a new epistemology: unlike people of earlier eras, we know something to be true today through experimentation and verification.” (Borg, pp. 15)

And there you have it- the most contrived equation of all time: Fact = Truth.

Long before Pi is cast out at sea, he goes through a period of time which may be described as self-discovery. It is an amazing journey in and of itself in which he brings together and reconciles two polarized schools of thought. The first is represented by a Mr. Kumar- a biology teacher for whom the above equation will not only settle all problems arising from inexplicable occurrences in nature, but also leaves him at peace with his surroundings. “When Mr. Kumar visited the zoo, it was to take the pulse of the universe, and his stethoscopic mind always confirmed to him that everything was in order, that everything was order. He left the zoo feeling scientifically refreshed.” (Pi, pp. 28) “Religion is darkness” (pp. 29) he says, obviously thinking that the metaphorized stories of a divine ‘God’ are a waste of time and thought when increasing numbers of phenomena may be so satisfyingly explained through scientific inquiry. Mr. Kumar fights with equal signs. Nevertheless he leaves lasting impact on Pi, challenging his budding faith.

The second dimension of Pi is his discovery of faith through three religious sects that are conventionally considered to be very different from one another: Christianity, Buddhism, and Islam. Marcus Borg would refer to the recognition and understanding of different faith bases as ‘religious pluralism’. He says that religious pluralism is a characteristic unique to the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, being directly related to Western multiculturalism. Because of this modern concept, “many of us find the exclusivistic claims of the Christian tradition impossible to accept.” (Borg, pp.14) For Pi, however, his deeply personal experiences in faith fortified with an active appreciation for the useful applications of scientific reasoning leave him fully equipped to cope with the trials ahead.

I speak now, of course, of Pi’s voyage across the Pacific. He loses his entire family and is left alone on a lifeboat with Richard Parker the Bengal tiger, a zebra, orang-utan, and a hyena. Eventually it is just Pi and Richard Parker left on the lifeboat. Naturally Pi is in a state of profound despair, and nearly drowns (metaphorically speaking) in a sea of futility and hopelessness.

“Am I allowed no explanation? Am I to suffer hell without any account from heaven? In that case, what is the purpose of reason Richard Parker? Is it no more than to shine at practicalities-the getting of food, clothing and shelter? Why can’t reason give greater answers?” (Pi, pp.98)

And yet, despite the horror of his situation, despite the overwhelming isolation and desolation, he reaches out to his faith, a blazing internal fire that feeds him from the inside-out. “I would have given up- if a voice hadn’t made itself heard in my heart.” (Pi, pp.148) Reason cannot give greater answers and yet Pi does not give up. However, Life of Pi is not the story of a miracle, that is, survival on faith alone. No, Pi knows that even in devotion to faith he cannot expect a divine rescue. “To look out with idle hope is tantamount to dreaming one’s life away.” (Pi, pp.186) God gave humans the ability to reason did he not? Once Pi listens to that inner voice proclaiming his own deep faith in life, he studiously applies all scientific knowledge made available to him through his upbringing in a zoo and the survivor’s manual aboard the lifeboat.

Thus, the reader watches the co-operative powers of human-employed faith and reason as they keep Pi alive. These powers are put to the test when the two Japanese officials ask to here Pi’s tale in order to discover any information regarding the sinking of the ship Pi was on, and how Pi survived for so long. Pi recounts his tale to them as the reader has heard it. Unfortunately for them, the two men find it impossible to believe such a story to be true because Pi cannot produce any factual evidence. Once again, fact is advocated as truth’s equal. “They apply rational criteria to the tale, but Martel [through Pi] shows these criteria to be insufficient.” (Keren, pp.8) "When one literalizes metaphor...the result is nonsense." (Borg, pp.47) The following is an excerpt from Pi's conversation with the two investigators:

Pi: "Love is hard to believe, ask any lover. Life is hard to believe, ask any scientist. God is hard to believe, ask any believer. What is your problem with hard to believe?

Investigator: "We’re just being reasonable."

Pi: "So am I! I applied reason at every moment. Reason is excellent for getting food, clothing and shelter. Reason is the very best tool kit. Nothing beats reason for keeping tigers away. But be excessively reasonable and you risk throwing out the universe with the bathwater. "

(Pi, pp. 330-331)

Through Pi, Martel is telling us that there is so much more to be understood than is scientifically quantifiable. But neither does he wish us to compartmentalize truth and fact for our own good. Pi’s survival heralds the realization that scientific inquiry is meaningless without a deeply rooted faith in life itself; that life in every way has a purpose and a place. But Life of Pi is not a call to religion either. In fact Pi says near the very beginning says that it is not atheists who bother him, but agnostics, such as the investigators he confers with much later: “To choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation.” (Pi, pp.31) The key to any life philosophy is a sense of moving forward.

Even if Pi’s story is all metaphor and no fact, it does not and cannot mean that it’s not true.

Like a ball carries potential energy, so does metaphor carry all the latent meaning in the world. The importance of metaphor’s multivalent nature is reflected in the face of a multicultural Canada, full of diverse reasoning, beliefs, philosophies, and raisons d'êtres. Pi's frustration with the investigators stems from the belief that the key to any consequential life philosophy is a sense of moving forward. Yann Martel has provided us with an engaging exposition that leaves his reader in no doubt that if we allow ourselves to become stagnant “fact-fundamentalists” (Borg, pp. 16) without giving all due respect to the complexities of truth and metaphor, we risk rendering all meaningful writing obsolete.

All Comments, Queries, Criticisms and Cundundrums Welcome!!!

When I started to read Life of Pi, many people asked me if I had read it before, because they had all read it years ago- when they were in grades 6, 7 and 8. I had not ever read it before. I am in grade 12. At first, I felt a little embarassed- as if I had not chosen a cornerstone of Canlit but a cute story about a boy on a boat with a tiger. But just as soon as I was embarassed, I was justified; I do not know how anyone could read Life of Pi at the age of 12, 13 or 14 and fully appreciate the fact that while it is on paper a story about a boy on a boat with a tiger, Yann Martel does not wish his reader to read solely what is on the page: he challenges his reader at every turn to comprehend the profound symbolism of the boy on a boat with a tiger...and all that goes with it.

My apologia is going to talk about this symbolism- indeed this allegory and it's connotations in society; perhaps more importantly it's connotations for the individual and then that individual as a part of society. I hope that through this initial exploration (which will involve religion, credibility, life philosophies, logic and the like) I will be able to weave it into support for this novel as a Canadian novel. An actual draft has yet to physically exist. Can drafts physically exist on a blog? Is physicality determined by all the senses or by touch only? Can the Japanese investigators believe that the algae island physically exists based on verbal description from Pi? Should they? Is plausibility similarily determined by all the senses? Anyway, enough rambling.

Questions pertaining specifically to the purpose of the apologia: why is symbolism so important in portraying the individual in society? Likewise, why is allegory so necessary when addressing religion and faith? Taken literally, why is so unlikely, so incredible a story so effective in conveying ideas to 'normal' people with relatively 'normal' lives?

Confessions of a reader cont'd

The phenomenon of Canada is that some how, despite ethnic and religious variety, we seek to forge an identity. We (and when I say 'we' I refer to Canadians since July 1st 1867) have continuously tried to sculpt what exactly it means to be Canadian. I firmly believe that one of the most pervading aspects of Canadian culture is the geography of our country. Despite the way we roll our eyes and laugh condescendingly at the "Igloo Theory" apparently upheld by the majority of American citizens, we adore jabs about the cold, about maple syrup, 'eh', hockey and so on with carefully concealed fervor- stereotypes at the very least mean that some sort of identity is perceived!

Carly left a most insightful comment today, if you care to look. She raised a point that is certainly worth exploring: that an ingrained part of Canadian culture (and consequently Can-lit) is our multi-culturalism and, more to the point, the diversity of faiths that accompany it. However, in this haven of cultures, we are privy to freedoms that account for and define the individual. With regards to Life of Pi, I would draw attention to the freedom(s) of religious practice. In reference to my original post, if religion affects every facet of a culture, what kind of culture- no, what kind of individual member of a patchwork culture does a multi-faith population create? That is to ask, are we made fuller beings by the interaction of so many cultures? Or as a whole do we lose grip on a solid identity both as a whole and individually? I know which way I would answer, but the apologia is a formal presentation of Life of Pi. I plan to explore the answer primarily through my novel.

If at all possible, I aspire to mold this question into the body of my apologia, along with an exploration of self and survival. I haven't worked this part out yet; early stages of developement n' all that.