The Life of Pi

I liked The Life of Pi. And, I accept Yann Martel's view that ideas can be borrowed. He clearly acknowledged borrowing this idea from Moacyr Scliar. Martel will win this lawsuit, if it ever gets that far.

I think I agree with some reviewers who argue that the water part could have used an edit. And, I think, in some respects, that the first part was more interesting. However, from a narrative point of view, I think most people have missed the essence of the book: it doesn't matter which story you believe because the author makes it clear that both never happened, even in the fictional world. In the end, the Japanese insurance guys prefer the story of the tiger, because it is a better story. I think that we can assume that the story, as a fiction, never happened, that the fiction is a fiction, that the fictitious author created the fictitious character to tell us two stories. In the end, it makes no difference which story is the right one, because they are both stories.

I know it sounds convoluted, but do you know what I mean?

Tags: reading