The first third of “Life of Pi” brought many opportunities for interpretation. Through reader response literary theory, examining the beginning brings various meanings to the text. My horizon of expectations broadened, enriching the understanding of “Life of Pi”.
“Life of Pi” begins with an explanation and background. In this it says “Richard Parker has stayed with me. I’ve never forgotten about him. (…) I still cannot understand how he could abbondon me so unceremoniously, without any sort of goodbye, without looking back even once” (Martel 7). I was formulating problems at this point. There was no explanation as to who Richard Parker was. Later in the novel it becomes evident that Richard Parker is the bengal tiger.
I believe there is some significance in the mystery of Richard Parker. Knowing the traumatizing experience Ravi and Pi observed as the tiger ate the goat, Richard Parker could be characterized as evil quite early on. However, believing Richard Parker is evil could affect the reader’s perceptions. The following quote shows a different perspective: “I still see him in my dreams. They are nightmare mostly, but nightmares tinged with love” (Martel 7). Before understanding who Richard Parker was, the readers hear that while he may seem scary, there is a tint of love. This could potentially allow the reader to understand how significant the tiger was to Pi. The readers would not allow the instinctive response to the tiger’s terrifying appearance cloud their judgement. I was able to develop a sympathetic perspective for Richard Parker by understanding how important he was to Pi.
As I continued to read I noticed similarities between Life of Pi and The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho. The Alchemist follows a spiritual journey of boy named Santiago in search of a treasure. He is unsure of what the treasure is, but follows his heart: “wherever your heart is, that’s where you will find your treasure” (Coelho 128). Despite any repercussions or hostility he faced, Pi follows his heart and practices three religions. Pi was Hindu, Muslim and Chrisitian all at once from a young age. Similar to Santiago, Pi continued his spiritual journey, for reasons unknown to himself. When Pi was pressured into choosing one religion he said “I just want to love God” (Martel 76). When I read this sentence to me it became clear that both Pi and Santiago were on spiritual journeys not for the treasure.
In my own observations I find that there are many different reasons to practice religions. Some find that it is comforting to know that their good morals or faith will provide them luck, fortune or a quality afterlife. Pi and Santiago are both characters who are spiritually aware for the personal fulfillment it brings for their conscious. For the two characters the “treasure” was the spiritually itself and the journey was only to test this. I believe that their spiritual journeys could potentially manifest into a quest that would test their patience and faith.
While the first part of the book seems more like background information, there appears to be moments of possible foreshadowing. An example of this could be the sign in the Pondicherry zoo “DO YOU KNOW WHICH IS THE MOST DANGEROUS ANIMAL IN THE ZOO?” (Martel 34). The sign leads to a mirror. I believe that this could possibly be both a reflection to the readers and foreshadowing.
Danger can be exhibited in many forms. A more obvious interpretation of this sign could be by feeding the animals in the zoo, humans can bring them harm. Another interpretation could be humans are possibly more mentaly developed than most animals and could be “dangerously” smart and can outwit even the strongest animal in the zoo. However, I believe that this sign illustrates the dangerous unpredictability and underlying savagery in humans. People cause harm daily, through pollution, war or even bullying. The sign could possibly outline how deep down all humans are dangerous. Furthermore, the ignorance of their own capabilities only makes humans more threatening. This could possibly foreshadow how, as the book continues, Pi exhibits savagery, brings harm or becomes “dangerous”.
By applying reader response literary theory in the first third of “Life of Pi”, the text provides many different interpretations. These interpretations developed and my perspective shifted as I proceeded to the second third. I discovered how the start of “Life of Pi” was not just background information but rather the development of perspective. This perspective would allow me to apply transactional analysis as I read the rest of “Life of Pi”.
Works Cited:
Coelho, Paulo. The Alchemist. HarperCollins Publishers, 1988.
Martel, Yann. Life of Pi. Vintage Canada, 2004.
Emilia's Thoughts 