Thursday, August 30, 2007

I Like Tigers

In Life of Pie, Yann Martel uses an interesting blend of human characters that, while completely human, lack any real definition or insight, and animals, while not actually human, emit human emotions and insights in greater amounts than many of the other characters. The animals occupy a more important role in the story than any other human except for the narrator, Pi Patel.

In looking at these characters, there is one that must be examined first and foremost: Richard Parker. And there the examination must start, with his name. See, with just a name, the reader has no idea who, or in this case, what, is being talked about. Someone who has never read the book would assume that the one being mentioned is a person. This, from the very outset, gives Richard Parker, a 450-pound adult Bengal Tiger, a human aspect. Richard Parker is not just some nameless creature, but is an active force in the novel, and one that the reader finds himself becoming attached to, because he has a name. But just because he has a human name, does not make him human. He is an animal, a carnivore, a predator.

When Pi is first in the life boat, just after the Japanese ship sank, Richard Parker is not depicted in the light of a dangerous predator. Instead, he is shown as almost pathetic, weak in the raging waters. Pi describes when he first sees Richard Parker, "He looked panic-stricken. He started swimming my way. The water about him was shifting wildly. He looked small and helpless." Pi tosses a lifebuoy to him, to try and help him reach the boat. Richard Parker is dependent upon Pi to bring him to safety. This is important in bringing human characteristics to Richard Parker. Throughout the novel, Richard Parker becomes increasingly dependent upon Pi for survival, in the way of food and fresh water. This not only lessons the threatening presence of Richard Parker in the eyes of the reader, but it puts Pi in a position of equality with Richard Parker, which not only brings Pi up to Richard Parker's level of superiority, but also brings Richard Parker to Pi's level of humanity.

Another powerful piece that really clarifies Richard Parker as a almost humane character appears towards the end of the novel. After Pi tells the Japanese investigators the story of what happened to him, he is confronted with doubt and disbelief. So, to satisfy them, he tells a different, shorter story involving humans instead of animals. However, one of the investigators, Mr. Okamoto, finds similarities between the two stories in the actions of the people and the animals, and the ultimate fate of everyone in the boat. The actions of Pi on the second story are the same as those of Pi and Richard Parker in the first. Realizing this, Mr. Chiba exclaims, "...which means [Pi]'s the tiger!"

Those these actions take place at the end of the novel, they have a profound influence on how one views the book. Richard Parker is personified through Pi in the second story he told the investigators, and in this way the reader looks back on the novel and thinks of the similarities of Pi and Richard Parker. Thanks to the ending passage, the reader can't help but think of Richard Parker as nearly human. And by combining the actions of Pi and Richard Parker into a new story, one with characters that parallel each other, the reader begins to question whether what was thought of Richard Parker the tiger was in reality human all along, in the form of Pi.

Ultimately, the reader has a choice to make, one which Pi gives Mr. Okamoto and Mr. Chiba: "Which story did you like better?" You can choose either a story of a miracle of survival, or a story of utter tragedy, one which leaves an almost bitter taste in the mouth after reading the first.

For me, I like tigers (661).

1 comment:

LCC said...

David,
You do a good job navigating a potentially tricky proposition. There is clearly a difference between anthopomorphizing an animal, giving it characteristics which resemble those of a human, and using those qualities to actually comment on the human nature of other characters. So arguing that the author merges the character of the tiger with that of the narrator, although there are parts of that argument I can't quite follow, adds an interesting dimension to the relationship between animal and human natures.

While you could have proofread just a little more carefully, this is a thoughtful and thought-provoking piece.

LCC