In my opinion, Martel uses different relationships to further explain his philosophical narratives. Throughout the story, he talks excessively about human vs. animal nature. By the way Martel describes them, they seem parallel to me. There are a couple of examples that jump into my mind.
1. On page 34 before Pi's father takes them to learn their lesson how ferocious the zoo animals are, the dad is doubtful Pi understands how dangerous tigers are. Pi mentions to himself that although he is young and imagines playing with the animals, he never disillusioned himself into believing they were ok to touch and snuggle with. This is a typical father/child relationship where the parent underestimates the child's common sense. 2. Page 39 at the end of chapter 8 addresses the very common sibling hierarchy. The older brother taking out his rage on the younger and trying to show his dominance through threats and brute strength. Martel speaks of this same relationship found between tiger in the wild as well as in circuses.
In both these instances, Martel shows everyday situations to explain the psychological nature of ALL animals. Oh, and by the way... Frankie is DBC.
I'm sure everything PI talks about will make sense by the end of the book. It must somehow all tie into each other intsead of PI just randomly telling parts of his life. I know this book's called the LIFE of PI but I'm pretty sure the author has some kind of flow. This whole talking about the past thing while the main story's going on is a bit annoying. I want to hear about the ship and tiger instead of phillosopy and God. I mean it's really interesting and everything but I want to hear one thing at a time. And i prefer the main story because there's more action involved which captures my attention. Don't get me wrong, I like to learn about new stuff like status's of animals and the different religions. But I prefer the cool action story.
Katie: i didn't even think of the whole human/animal nature. That's interesting you think they're parallel and it makes sense now that i look back on the tiger devouring the goat. PI talks about surviving school based on how well you interact and blend in. Both of those examples sound simliar. I can definately think of some differences though. Like we don't eat other poeple normally.
"The life of a zoo, like the life of its inhabitants in the wild, is precarious. It is neither big enough a business to be above the law nor small enough to survive on its margins." So basically, the zoo buisness is a type of animal that's not powerful or controlling but also not small enough to go unnoticed. Probably a zebra. Something big but not all powerful. Easy prey. I'm talking about human vs. animal nature. I'm comparing a type of business with a certain type of animal. So i'm comparing status.
3 comments:
In my opinion, Martel uses different relationships to further explain his philosophical narratives. Throughout the story, he talks excessively about human vs. animal nature. By the way Martel describes them, they seem parallel to me. There are a couple of examples that jump into my mind.
1. On page 34 before Pi's father takes them to learn their lesson how ferocious the zoo animals are, the dad is doubtful Pi understands how dangerous tigers are. Pi mentions to himself that although he is young and imagines playing with the animals, he never disillusioned himself into believing they were ok to touch and snuggle with. This is a typical father/child relationship where the parent underestimates the child's common sense.
2. Page 39 at the end of chapter 8 addresses the very common sibling hierarchy. The older brother taking out his rage on the younger and trying to show his dominance through threats and brute strength. Martel speaks of this same relationship found between tiger in the wild as well as in circuses.
In both these instances, Martel shows everyday situations to explain the psychological nature of ALL animals.
Oh, and by the way... Frankie is DBC.
I'm sure everything PI talks about will make sense by the end of the book. It must somehow all tie into each other intsead of PI just randomly telling parts of his life. I know this book's called the LIFE of PI but I'm pretty sure the author has some kind of flow.
This whole talking about the past thing while the main story's going on is a bit annoying. I want to hear about the ship and tiger instead of phillosopy and God. I mean it's really interesting and everything but I want to hear one thing at a time. And i prefer the main story because there's more action involved which captures my attention. Don't get me wrong, I like to learn about new stuff like status's of animals and the different religions. But I prefer the cool action story.
Katie: i didn't even think of the whole human/animal nature. That's interesting you think they're parallel and it makes sense now that i look back on the tiger devouring the goat. PI talks about surviving school based on how well you interact and blend in. Both of those examples sound simliar. I can definately think of some differences though. Like we don't eat other poeple normally.
"The life of a zoo, like the life of its inhabitants in the wild, is precarious. It is neither big enough a business to be above the law nor small enough to survive on its margins." So basically, the zoo buisness is a type of animal that's not powerful or controlling but also not small enough to go unnoticed. Probably a zebra. Something big but not all powerful. Easy prey. I'm talking about human vs. animal nature. I'm comparing a type of business with a certain type of animal. So i'm comparing status.
Post a Comment