Life Of Pi

Discoveries are subjective, allowing them and their authenticity to be questioned or challenged when viewed from different perspectives. The Life of Pi, originally written by Yaan Martel and then developed into a film directed by Ang Lee, thoroughly explores and represents the concept of discovery and perspective, as well as how they are interlinked. Perspectives give discoveries their meaning and significance upon an individual. With multiple perspectives; the nature, implications and authenticity of a discovery varies according to personal beliefs, context and ideology. Lee illustrates this by manipulating the audience’s viewpoint over the course of the film so that by the conclusion, the audience finds themselves challenging their own original
In the case of Life of Pi; Pi’s direct characterisation and narration provides the audience with this perspective. Pi recounts the story of his childhood, the majority of which is devoted to his 227 days adrift in the Pacific Ocean with an adult Bengal tiger named Richard Parker, during which he must confront nature, his own values, spirituality as well as the evil inside of himself. Pi’s beliefs directly juxtapose those of our westernised ethnocentric culture; where we value fact over fiction, science over belief and reason over imagination. This is especially evident in the film where Pi tells the audience about his polytheistic beliefs, devoting himself to three separate religions; Islam, Hindu and Christianity. Individuals who value reason over faith would respond in a way much like his father, questioning and challenging his religious discoveries and beliefs. His father states that “believing in everything at the same time is the same as not believing any anything at all” and encourages Pi to “start with reason”. His mother however holds a different perspective and ideology, encouraging Pi religious journey by stating; “science can teach us more about what is out there, but not about that is in
The concluding scenes of the film are constructed to challenge the audience’s beliefs; The Japanese investigators demand that Pi tell a different story, “a story we can all believe”, “the truth”, this example of someone questioning the authenticity of a discovery leads Pi to tell a second story, contradicting his original. The audience subjectively analyses the two stories based on personal aesthetic or rational preferences. The first story appeals to individuals who favour faith and imagination over reason and logic; these are individuals who exert a high degree of poetic faith. The second story appeals to individuals who instead rely on fact and realism. Western culture and beliefs dictate that the majority of audiences should instead believe the second story, because although it defies ethical interaction, it seems plausible and relatively realistic in comparison. However the majority of audiences instead prefer the first story as the