When examining “Life of Pi” through an archetypal literary theory, I was able to gain a deeper insight and understanding of Piscine Patel’s story. The perspective changed my perception of the characters. Looking at “Life of Pi” as a whole through an archetypal literary theory lens, it can be seen how Pi possibly changed one of his stories to align with what each character symbolized.
At the end of the novel, Pi tells the Japanese officials a supplementary story after they ask “what really happened” (Martel 335). Pi tells a story similar to the previous one, but switching the roles of the animals with humans. In the first story the boat contains a zebra, orangutan, hyena and tiger. In the second story there is a sailor, Pi’s mother, the cook and Pi. Through this I was able to notice many different symbols crucial in the development of “Life of Pi”.
Each story Pi told begins with either the zebra or sailor breaking its leg, weak and suffering. The zebra and sailor aligned with the archetype of The Child. This is seen in the quote “he broke his leg jumping from the ship and his suffering made him a child” (Martel 337). From the moment the zebra/sailor had landed in the lifeboat they were already weak and powerless among the larger and authoritative animals. The archetype of the child is viewed as innocent and weaker. The zebra and sailors were the first, in both versions of the story, to die. Their innocence was evident as they didn’t agitate or provoke any of the other members in the boat. The Child’s innocence typically doesn’t prepare the Child for withstanding the challenges of reality. Unfortunately, the weakness exhibited by the zebra and sailor brought on their own demise, executed by the cook and hyena.
The cook/hyena is a complicated character. I believe it to be a reflection of human impulse and instinct. The second story mentions the cook was eating flies, food found in the boat and eventually eating parts of the sailor. In the first story the hyena is described as a “devastating hunter” (Martel 128). The cook and hyena are both hungry animals willing to eat anything to sustain them. This is shown in the hyena by the quote: “accidental cannibalism is a common occurrence during the excitement of a feeding (…) The hyena feels no disgust at this mistake. Its delights are too many to admit disgust at anything” (Martel 129). Both the hyena and cook, committing acts of cannibalism, symbolize the savagery and selfishness of animals when in need.
The hyena and cook follow the archetype of The Temptation. Through the savage acts, the violence of the cook and hyena cause Pi (or Richard Parker) to commit his own violent act. Richard Parker revealed himself by mauling the hyena. Similarly, Pi’s first real submission to savagery was clear when he killed the cook “I stabbed him in the throat, next to the Adam’s apple. He dropped like a stone. And died” (Martel 345). The significance of this through archetypal criticism is Richard Parker was Pi’s embodiment of savagery. By the hyena/cook representing the evil temptation, Pi faced a spiritual and moral obstacle in his journey. Pi stabbed the cook beside the Adam’s apple letting his savagery be released. Similarly, Richard Parker was revealed when he gave in to The Temptation, killing the hyena. Marking the turning point in their journey, the descent into danger becomes steeper for Richard Parker and Pi.
Also, the archetypal criticism viewed Pi’s mother in a new perspective. Following the archetype of The Mother, the orangutan and Pi’s mother brought loving protection. In the first version of his story, Pi sees the orangutan float toward the boat on a net of bananas and exclaims “Oh blessed Great Mother” (Martel 123). In his astonishment, Pi feels sorry that the orangutan would have to “witness this tragedy”. The orangutan and Pi’s mother brought protection, comfort and love. Pi did not exhibit any violence or savagery with the orangutan or his mother present. The “Great Mother” protected Pi from the violence of the hyena and his own violent tendencies. The archetypal literary perspective can show the significance between this comparison and cause readers to question how the archetype of the Mother affected Pi.
The moment I finished “Life of Pi” I closed the book and took a moment to think. I reviewed the book through archetypal literary criticism to gain a deeper understanding of “Life of Pi”. This literary criticism allowed me to see the depth of this book. It was through examining the different symbols I was able to interpret the text in a new meaning. My new interpretations made me analyze each character. My questions were answered and I had new ones. Through this literary criticism, I came to believe the message of “Life of Pi” was not about Pi’s will to live, but rather the tests of survival.
Works Cited:
Martel, Yann. Life of Pi. Vintage Canada, 2004.
Emilia's Thoughts 