Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Your participation in postings, pictures, links and your responses to other student's posts will determine your final grade. The goal of this blog is to supplement what has been discussed, read or written in class. Occasionally I will post a query or task with the expectation that you will eagerly respond. The same respect and diplomacy that is expected of you in the classroom extends to blogging space.
11 comments:
Wow... I finished the book last night, and despite enjoying it, I found it to be kind of anticlimactic. I knew that there would be some sort of explanation for everything, but half of the "made up" story (with the animals) seemed unimportant (though I know it's not). The things that were explained only made up for about 1/10 of the novel, leaving the rest up for interpretation. All right, I see how that makes it a great novel to study for English, but things like the island really didn't seem to fit.
I think that the story without the animals is the real one.
I liked the ending, it left you questioning which one could be true. The one without the animals gave sense to the story if you didn't want to believe the one with them. I definitely liked the story with the animals better, it had so much more to it. I think that the second story was only made up to satisfy the japanese men. Because this is fiction, I think the one with the animals is real.
I thought the ending was sort of confusing, I also thought that it was a little anticlimactic. The second story Pi told with the his mom, the cook and the sailor on the lifeboat seems untrue. I can see how Pi put that story together because it related so much with the animal story with them killing each other. I can't really say which story I believe more though, but I'm leaning more towards the animal story. It just seems very surreal but it can happen.
I find it interesting that everyone thinks that the animal story is the true one. The part where Pi says that the animal story could happen, despite how unrealistic it is, almost felt like he was trying to make a point about faith rather than prove that he was telling the truth. That being said, Pi's "faith" story is more emotionally deep, whereas the other just has the plain facts. Pi even says that the animal story is the more interesting one, and that almost makes me think that it's just a romanticized version of the other story because it explains so much about himself through his and Richard Parker's actions. If the animal story is the real one, the novel seems to have less depth, and there's no irony in the fact that the Japanese men chose that story over the realistic one (which I think says a lot about humans and religion).
I agree with steph that the animal story makes the book more interesting. I think that the one without animals is true, Pi just tells it with animals to prove a point to the Japanese men. Even though they make it seem like they don't believe the Richard Parker story, they say that this is the true one in their report. I think that Pi finds it easiest to relate his story to animals because this is the environment in which he was born and raised.
I think that the story without the animals is definitely much easier to believe, however, it doesn't explain all of the details of the other story. As previously stated, the island makes no sense in context with the "real story" - it states that Richard Parker (Apparently Pi) went back to the boat each night, whereas Pi camped out in a tree (how could he do both?)
Situations such as this, make me think that there may be parts from each story that are true.
A story about a couple people on a boat would have seem rather boring compared to taming a tiger on a life raft.
Also, I strongly dissagree that it was anticlimatic. This ending was genius! It really made me think. I really don't see how this book could have had a better ending.
To Adam, I think that the island represents more of an emotional state than a physical thing. I'm not going to completely tell you what I'm thinking, since that would involve me writing out a giant chunk of my essay, but maybe the shift in RP and Pi's relationship on the island kind of represents Pi's descent into utter desperateness (which we see in the animal story when he goes blind and talks to the French man). Pi and RP become sort of distant on the island, and Pi needs to re-train RP to stay alive. Like you said, parts from each story could be true. In both cases, I'm fairly sure that Pi's levels of sanity and faith waver.
im not sure if i liked the ending. it left me questioning the story which i think was the whole point. I really had the think back about what i had been reading..not just close the book and toss it aside. But parts were sort of random. Like stephanie! said, the island just didnt really fit. As i was reading i thought it was pretty interesting.. but then it just was forgotten and the author never mentioned it again or explained it really.
I enjoyed the part when Pi was telling the second story about the non-animal version. I saw the similarities and how Pi could have created the animals afterwards to deal with the traumatic experience.
Overall, it was a pretty interesting book. I might not have read it unless for studying it with a class so im glad that this book was chosen.
Post a Comment